is ig = Z | 
 pres 
 — oe Geran rk haf He RSE Ra es gry tbe eo $n Tt 
 Li > Pe Pr Sil e h RAI a oT oA ornare 
 : ican palicectwisatcecrecuRs Sat stoner ty : 
 | : Se ee a ---=0- =e o- one rs 
 2 ¢ ) > | eed ee ine” : zg S | | 
 
THE NEW BIBLE COMMENTARY. 
 
 Now ready, Vou. I.-(in Two Parts), Meprum Ocravo, 30s. 
 
 THE HOLY BIBLE, 
 
 ACCORDING TO THE AUTHORIZED VERSION, A.D. 1611. 
 
 With an Explanatory and Critical Commentary, and a Revision of 
 the Translation, 
 
 _. BY BISHOPS AND OTHER CLERGY OF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH. 
 
 Vol. I—THE PENTATEUCH. 
 CONTENTS : 
 
 Parr I GENESIS—Bisnop or Ety. 
 * ( EXODUS—Canon Cook and Rey. SAMUEL CLARK. 
 
 LEVITICUS—RgEy. SAmMvuEL CLARK. 
 Part II. ¢ NUMBERS— Rey. T. E. Esprn. 
 DEUTERONOMY— Hey J. F. THRupp. 
 
 2 eae want of a plain Explanatory COMMENTARY ON THE 
 
 BIBLE more complete and accurate than any now accessible to 
 English Readers has been long felt by men of education. In 1863 the 
 SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS consulted some 
 of the Bishops as to the best way of supplying the deficiency ; and 
 the ARCHBISHOP OF YORK undertook to organize a plan for 
 producing such a work, by the co-operation of Scholars selected 
 for their Biblical learning. 
 
 The great object of such a Commentary must be to put the general 
 reader in full possession of whatever information may be requisite to 
 enable him to understand the Holy Scriptures, to give him, as far as 
 possible, the same advantages as the Scholar, and to supply him with 
 satisfactory answers to. objections resting upon misr Se eouison of 
 the Text. 
 
 It has been decided to reprint, without alteration, the Authorized 
 Version from the edition of 1611, with the marginal references and 
 renderings. Special care is taken to furnish in all cases amended 
 translations of passages proved to be incorrect in our Version. The 
 Comment will be chiefly explanatory, presenting, in a concise and 
 readable form, the results of learned investigations, carried on in this 
 and other countries during the last half century. When fuller dis- 
 cussions of difficult passages or important subjects are necessary, they 
 will be placed at the end of the Chapter or of the Volume. 
 
 [ Continued, 
 
2 THE NEW BIBLE COMMENTARY. 
 
 — = 
 
 The plan of the work has been settled and the writers have been 
 appointed, under the sanction of a Committee consisting of :— 
 
 ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, BISHOP OF CHESTER, 
 ARCHBISHOP OF YORK, Lorp Ly?rrreitTon, 
 
 BisHor oF Lonpon, RieHt Hon. THE SPEAKER, 
 BisHop OF LLANDAFF, Riaut Hon. SPENCER WALPOLE, 
 
 BisHop oF GLOUCESTER & Briston, | DEAN oF LINCOLN. 
 
 The conduct of the work—as general Editor—has been entrusted to 
 the Rey. F. C. Cook, M.A., Canon of Exeter, Preacher: at Lincoln’s 
 Inn, and Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen. 
 
 The ARCHBISHOP OF YORK, in consultation with the Rraius -PRo- 
 FESSORS OF DIVINITY OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE, advises with the 
 general Editor, upon questions arising during the progress of the work. 
 
 The work will be divided into Eight Sections. The following is the 
 List of Contributors sanctioned by the Committee. 
 
 Section |, The Pentateuch :— 
 
 GENESIS... oe. -e-ccceee Right Rev. E. Harotp Browne, D.D., Lord Bishop. 
 of Ely. 
 EXODUS, Chap. I.-XIX. .... The Epiror. 
 .j 9) XX.totheend Rey. Samuen CLARK, M.A., Vicar of Bredwardine. 
 MEVITICUS .0c).-02s Go Rey. SamueL CLark, M.A. : 
 Rey. T. E. Esprn, B.D., Warden of Queen’s College, 
 NUMBERS and DEUTE- Birmingham, Examining Chaplain to the Bishop 
 RONOMY of Chester, and Rector of Wallasey. 
 
 Rey. J. F. Turupp, M.A., late Vicar of Barrington. 
 
 Section Il, The Historical Books :— 
 
 IROL UA ca yetrce scr tnes te aretes Rey. T. E. Esprn, B.D. 
 
 Right Rev. Lord ArtHur Hervey, D.D., Lord 
 Bishop of Bath and Wells. 
 
 JUDGES, RUTH, SAMUEL. 
 
 Rey. GEORGE RAWLINSON, M.A., Camden Professor 
 
 KINGS, CHRONICLES, 
 of Ancient History at Oxford, 
 
 EZRA, NEHEMIAH, 
 
THE NEW BIBLE COMMENTARY. 3 
 
 Section II]. The Poetical Books :— 
 
 ee ed | oho aa The Epiror. 
 . Very Rev. G. H. S. Jonnson, M.A., Dean of Wells. 
 ROR o.oo Casensineds-*- The Epiror. 
 
 Rey. C. I. Extiorr, M.A., Vicar of Winkfield. 
 
 Rey. E. H. PLumrrre, M.A., Prebendary of St. Paul’s. 
 __ PROVERBS .........0.-..00-+-. and Rector of Pluckley. 
 ECCLESIASTES ............... Rev. W. T. Buttock, M.A., Secretary to the S.P.G. 
 SONG OF SOLOMON ......... Rev. T. Kinessury, M.A., Trinity Coll., Cambridge: 
 
 Section IV. The Four Great Prophets :— 
 { Rev. W. Kay, D.D., late Principal of Bishop’s 
 
 i r College, Caleutta, Rector of Great Leighs. 
 Very Rev. R. Payne Smitu, D.D., Dean of Can- 
 JEREMIAH :¢,..80.:.......-.- trae , 
 EZEKIEL Rey. G. Currey, D.D., Master of the Charter: 
 SMMrach 24-8 Po detsca hoe Tohse. 
 § Ven. H. J. Rosr, B.D., Archdeacon of Bedford, and: 
 OS SE eae Rector of Houghton Conquest. 
 
 Section V. The Twelve Minor Prophets :— 
 
 Right Rev. Connor Turrtwatt, D.D., Lord Bishop of St. David’s. 
 
 Rev. E. Huxrasir, M.A., Prebendary of Wells, and 
 Sent SONAL .....,... Vicar of Weston Zoyland. 
 
 AMOS and other PROPHETS Sa ee M.A., Professor of Arabic, 
 
 . Rey. F. Meyrick, M.A., Examining Chaplain to the: 
 JOEL and OBADIAH ......... Bishop of Lincoln, and Rector of Blickling with 
 Erpingham. 
 Rey. W. Drake, M.A., Chaplain in Ordinary to the: 
 ZECHARIAH and MALACHI Queen, Hon. Canon of Worcester, and Rector 
 of Sedgebrook. 
 
 Section VI. The Gospels and Acts :— 
 
 Most Rev. W. Tuomson, D.D., Lord Archbishop of 
 ST. MATTHEW & ST. MARK York. 
 
 Very Rev. H. L. Manse, B.D., Dean of St. Paul’s, 
 Ven. Wo. Basit Jones, M.A., Archdeacon and Pre- 
 
 bendary of York, Examining Chaplain to the 
 Archbishop, and Vicar of Bishopthorpe. 
 
 Rey. B. F. Westcott, B.D., Regius Professor of 
 
 a Ie 
 
 Divinity at Cambridge, and Canon of Peter- 
 borough. 
 
 THE ACTS epee W. Jacozson, D.D., Lord Bishop of 
 yivectuearenee eta estar 
 
 cnoemmeramgtowen 
 
 ~S > ARK 
 
4 THE NEW BIBLE COMMENTARY. 
 
 Section VII, The Epistles of St. Paul :— 
 
 Nev. E. H. Grrrorp, D.D., Honorary Canon of 
 WLOMLAN SiS cies va tag et nr te Worcester, Examining Chaplain to the Bishop 
 of London, and Rector of Walgrave. 
 
 ( Rey. T. Evans, M.A., Canon of Durham, and Pro- 
 
 fi , ° . gis : 
 1, and II. CORINTHIANS ... essor of Greek in Durham University. 
 
 | Rev. 4 . Warre, M.A., Master of University College, 
 e urham. 
 
 CRATE nn | a eres a 
 
 SE ULE SL LANS Mc ea seseen Very Rey. J. A. Jeremiz, D.D., Dean of Lincoln. 
 
 Rev. J. B. Liautrroot, D.D., Hulsean Professor of 
 
 EPHESIANS, COLOSSIANS, Divinity, Cambridge, and Canon of St. Paul's. 
 THESSALONIANS, and j} Rey. B. F. Wesrcort, B.D. 
 
 PHILEMON........,......... Rev. E. W. Benson, D.D., Head Master of Wel- 
 
 lington College, Examining Chaplain to the 
 L ‘Bishop of Lincoln. 
 
 Right Rev. Jonn Jackson, D.D., Lord Bishop of 
 PASTORAL EPISTLES ...... te 2.0, 
 
 HEBREW <..-7+0scknvacs erate Rey. W. Kay, D.D. 
 
 Section VIII], The Catholic Epistles and Revelation :— 
 
 Right Rey. W. ALEXANDER, D.D., Lord Bishop of 
 EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN ... “3 Derry and Raphoe. 4 : 
 
 EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES... Very Rev. Roserr Scorr, D.D., Dean of Rochester. 
 ST, PETER and ST.JUDE.... The Epiror. 
 
 Ven. W. Lez, D.D., Archdeacon of Dublin, and 
 REVELATION OF ST. JOHN Examining Chaplain to the Lord Archbishop of 
 Dublin. 
 
 JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET, LONDON. 
 
fee EN PATE UCE: 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 PAGE PAGE 
 Pentateuch, names of the Book or Books 1 Captivity and Return 12 
 Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch . a New Testament. : Ae 
 
 (1) Moses could have written the (3) Internal Evidence of Mosaic Au- 
 Pentateuch . ‘ ‘ iw thorship. . ‘ . : » 45 
 (2) External Evidence of Mosaic Acquaintance with Egypt > O85 
 Authorship. : ; er — with Sinai and 
 fon ‘ : 4 Wilderness . $ wed 
 udges . : - 5 Canaan i t. 
 History of Samuel . p eu6 Pnght ee < : : 8 
 Times of David and Solomon . 8 Question of Post-Mosaic Authorship 
 Divided Kingdom ~1 9 considered : < ‘ « Ig 
 Reign of Josiah Io 
 
 HE title, Pentateuch, is the Greek 
 
 name given by the LX<X. trans- 
 lators to the five books of Moses, the 
 name by which they were known among 
 the Jews being “the Law,” Zorah. In 
 the Scriptures it is called “the Book 
 of the Law” (2 K. xxii. 8), ‘the Book 
 miner covenant” (2K. xxill. 2, 21; 
 2 Chr. xxxiv. 30), “the Book of the 
 Law of the Lord” (2 Chr. xvii. 9, xxxiv. 
 14), “The Law~of Moses,” “ The 
 Book of Moses,” or ‘The Book of 
 the Law of Moses.” (See 2 Chr. xxv. 4, 
 Xxxv. 12; Ezra vi, 18, vil. 6; Neh. viii. 1, 
 xiii. I). 
 
 The division into five books is by many 
 thought to be also due to the LXX. in- 
 terpp. The Jews, however, retain the 
 division, calling the whole chamishah 
 chomeshe torah, ‘The five quinquernions 
 of the Law,” though they only distinguish 
 the several books by names derived from 
 a leading word in the first verse in each. 
 Thus Genesis they call Bereshith, t.e. “in 
 the Beginning,” Exodus Shemoth, “the 
 Names,” &c, . | | 
 
 VoL. I, 
 
 The Mosaic Origin of the Pentateuch. 
 
 That Moses was the author and writer 
 of the Pentateuch was the belief of all 
 Jewish and Christian antiquity, if at least 
 we except some heretical sects in the 
 early Christian centuries, who desired in 
 all ways to disparage the Old Testament. 
 The sacred narrative itself contains asser- 
 tions of this authorship. Thus, Ex. xvii. 
 14, after a memorable battle, ‘““The Lorp 
 said unto Moses, Write this for a memo- 
 rial in the book (1}P3);” as though there 
 were a regular account kept in a well- 
 known book. Again, Ex. xxiv. 4, ‘Moses 
 wrote all the words of the Lorn.” So Ex, 
 xxxiv. 27, ‘The Lorp said unto Moses, 
 Write thou these words.” In Num. xxxili. 
 2, we read that ‘‘Moses wrote their goings 
 out according to their journeys by the 
 commandment of the Lorp.” In Deut. 
 xvii. 18, 19, it is commanded that the 
 king, who should hereafter reign, should 
 ‘write him a copy of this law in a book 
 out of that which is before the priests 
 the Levites;” and in Deut. xxx1. 9, 10,21, 
 
 A 
 
2 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 at the veryend of the Pentateuch, we read, 
 ‘‘ Moses wrote this law, and delivered it 
 unto the priests the sons of Levi,” com- 
 manding, that ‘‘at the end of every seven 
 years” they should “read this law before 
 all Israel in their hearing.” Several times 
 Moses himself in Deuteronomy names 
 “this law,” and ‘‘the Book of this law” 
 (Deut. xxviii. 61, xxix. 19, 20, 29), as 
 though he had written a book for his 
 people to keep.” “With this ‘uniformity 
 
 of tradition and theseclaims, there is. at. 
 
 least a presumption in favour of the Mo- 
 saic authorship. It will however be well 
 to shew, 
 
 1. That Moses could have written the 
 Pentateuch. 
 
 2. That the concurrent woes of 
 all subsequent times proves that he did 
 write the Pentateuch. 
 
 3. That the internal evidence points 
 to ‘him, and to him only, as the writer 
 of the Pentateuch. 
 
 Let it only be understood, zz Lmune, 
 that this authorship thus claimed for 
 Moses is not inconsistent with certain 
 admissions, 
 
 (2) For instance, jt is.not necessary 
 to insist, that every word of the Penta- 
 teuch was written down by the hand of 
 Moses in his own autograph. He may 
 have dictated much, or all of it, to Joshua, 
 or to some secretary or scribe. He may 
 have merely superintended its writing, 
 and stamped it with his own authority, 
 as perhaps St Peter did the Gospel ac- 
 cording to St Mark. ‘This may explain 
 (though it is not necessary to assume 
 this in order to explain) the fact, that 
 Moses is always spoken of in the third 
 person’, This may explain also some 
 things said concerning Moses, which he 
 might have allowed others to write, but 
 would not have been likely to write 
 himself.) This may explain the difficulty, 
 if difficulty indeed it be, that the last 
 chapter of Deuteronomy relates the death 
 of Moses; for what more likely, than 
 that he, who wrote at Moses’ dictation 
 the acts and the words of Moses, should 
 have finished the work by recording Mo- 
 ses’ death ? 
 
 . 1 When Caesar always. writes of himself in 
 the third person, and when the like practice has 
 been known to most nations, it seems hard to 
 deny that Moses could have so written, . 
 
 (2) It is not necessary to deny, that 
 the Pentateuch, though the work of the 
 great Prophet and Lawgiver whose name 
 it bears, may have undergone some 
 recension in after times, as by Ezra or 
 others, The Jews hold that all the books 
 of the Old Testament were submitted to 
 a careful review by Ezra and the Great 
 Synagogue (Buxtorf, ‘Tiberias,’ Lib, 1. 
 c. 10); and the fathers of the Church 
 
 ‘generally believed’ in some such super- 
 
 vision. -**Omne instrumentum Judaicz 
 literaturze per Esdram constat restaura- 
 tum” (Tertull. ‘De Cultu Femin.’ c. 3). 
 ‘‘Sive Mosen dicere volueris auctorem 
 Pentateuchi, sive Esram ejusdem instau- 
 ratorem operis, non recuso” (Hieron. ‘ad 
 Helvidium,’ edit. Vall. Tom. 11. p. 212). 
 If Ezra collated MSS. and carefully 
 edited the books of Moses, it is not im- 
 possible, and is not inconsistent with the 
 original authorship, that he should have 
 admitted explanatory notes, which some 
 think (rightly or wrongly) to betray a 
 post-Mosaic hand. 
 
 (c) It is not necessary to deny that 
 Moses had certain documents or tradi- 
 tions referring to the patriarchal ages, 
 which: he incorporated into his history. 
 Indeed it is most likely that such tradi- 
 tions should have come down through 
 Shem and Abraham to Joseph and the 
 Israelites in Egypt: and there can be 
 no reason why an inspired historian 
 should not have worked up such trust- 
 worthy materials into the history of the: 
 ancestors of his people. 
 
 I. Moses could have written the Penta- 
 teuch. 
 
 The most sceptical of modern ob- 
 jectors do not deny the existence of 
 Moses, nor that he was the leader of 
 his own people. out of Egypt into Ca- 
 naan. We have then the fact, that. 
 there was a man, evidently of some ge- 
 nius and energy, who led a nation out 
 of captivity, and settled them in a state 
 of civil government in another land. He 
 came out of the most civilized country. 
 in the world, and he most probably had 
 acquired much of its civilization, 
 
 The first question then, which naturally 
 occurs is, Was the art of writing known 
 so early as Moses? and especially was it 
 known to the Egyptians and. the (es be 
 
THE: PENTALTEUCH; 3 
 
 ‘Recent researches prove the early ex- 
 istence of writing power in Egypt. Hie- 
 roglyphics are as ancient as the earliest 
 Egyptian monuments, and the cursive 
 hieratic character is to be found in mo- 
 numents, parchments, and papyri cen- 
 turies before the time of Moses. <A few 
 examples will clearly prove this. ‘The 
 famous group of figures in the tomb of 
 Chnoumhotep at Beni Hassan, which be- 
 longs to the twelfth dynasty, represents 
 a scribe as presenting to the governor a 
 roll of papyrus covered with an inscrip- 
 tion, bearing the date of the sixth year of 
 Osirtasen II. This was certainly many 
 centuries before the Exodus, according 
 to most scholars even before the time of 
 Abraham (see Brugsch, ‘ Hist. d’Egypte,’ 
 p. 63). At a later period, in the reign of 
 Menephthah L., of the nineteenth dynasty, 
 whom many have identified with the 
 Pharaoh of the Exodus, we have a papy- 
 rus in the cursive hieratic character, (the 
 Papyrus Anastasi, No. 1), which gives a 
 list of nine authors distinguished for their 
 writings in theology, philosophy, history, 
 and poetry (Brugsch, p. 177, note). But 
 the most remarkable of all is the papyrus 
 found by M. Prisse, written in the hie- 
 ratic character, and translated by M. 
 Chabas, which contains two treatises ; 
 the first, consisting of twelve pages, is 
 the conclusion of a work, of which the 
 earlier part is destroyed. It treats of 
 moral subjects, and is written in an ela- 
 borate and elevated style. ‘The second 
 treatise is by a royal author, son of the 
 king next preceding Assa, in whose reign 
 the work was composed. ‘This is con- 
 sidered to be the most ancient of exist- 
 ing MSS, It is attributed to a prince of 
 the fifth dynasty, who represents him- 
 self as weighed down with age, and in- 
 vokes the aid of Osiris to enable him to 
 give to mankind the fruits of his long 
 experience, (See De Rougé, ‘ Recueil de 
 Rapports, Progrés des Etudes Relatives 
 a l’Egypte etal’ Orient,’ p.55, Paris, 1867. 
 Also Brugsch, pp. 29—32.) The anti- 
 quity of this document is incalculable. 
 There can therefore be no reason to 
 doubt, that Moses, brought up in the 
 house of Pharaoh, and learned in all the 
 
 learning of the Egyptians, had acquired. 
 
 the art of writing. 
 But the Semitic nations had also a 
 
 knowledge of the same:art from the most 
 ancient times, The traditions of Greece 
 point to Cadmus (2.2. *‘ the eastern”), the. 
 brother of Europa, as having introduced 
 letters from Phoenicia into Europe. These 
 traditions belong to the mythic ages of 
 Greece, and, having been varied by later 
 authors, can only be taken for what they 
 are worth; but in their earliest form 
 they point to Phoenicia as the teacher 
 of Greece, and go on to say that parch- 
 ments of goat and sheep skin were used 
 by the Phcenicians for the purposes of 
 writing (Herod. v. 58). Moreover, these 
 traditions are confirmed by the fact that 
 the letters of the Greek alphabet have 
 the same names and order with those of. 
 the alphabets of the Semitic races; and 
 the names have a meaning in Semitic 
 but none in Greek, which proves that 
 the Greeks took them from the Phe- 
 nicians, not the Phcenicians from the 
 Greeks. In an Egyptian monument a 
 Hittite 1s specially named as a writer. 
 Pentaour, a royal scribe of the reign 
 of Rameses the Great (as some think 
 before, but more probably soon after, 
 the Exodus), composed a poem, which 
 is described as a kind of Egyptian Iliad, 
 and which was engraved on the walls of 
 the temple of Karnac. This mentions 
 by name Chirapsar, among the Kheta 
 (ze. the Hittites), as a writer of books 
 (Brugsch, p. 139); with which has. been 
 compared the fact, that Joshua took a 
 city of the Hittites, the ancient name 
 of which was Kirjath-sepher, z¢ ‘the 
 city of the book” (Josh. xv. 15), and 
 
 that he changed that name to Debir, a 
 
 word of similar significance. 
 
 _ It is observed by Ewald (‘Geschichte 
 des Volkes Israel,’ Vol. 1. p. 77.. Eng. 
 Tr. by Martineau, pp. 50, 51), that the 
 words for “write,” ‘“‘book,” and ink” 
 (an3,. 76D, 1), belong .to all. the 
 branches and dialects of Semitic (except 
 that the Ethiopic and south Arabic have 
 pny for “to write”). From this he infers 
 that writing in a book with ink must have 
 been known to the earliest Semites be- 
 fore they separated off into their various 
 tribes, nations, and families, He con- 
 cludes, and he cannot be accused of 
 over credulity, that ‘‘ Whatever the Se- 
 mitic people may be, to which half the 
 civilized world owes this invaluable in- 
 
 A2 
 
4 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 vention, so much is incontrovertible, that 
 it appears in history as a possession of 
 the Semitic nations long before Moses ; 
 and we need not scruple to assume that 
 Israel knew and used it in Egypt before 
 Moses.” 
 
 ~ Tf then writing existed in Egypt and 
 Israel, it is certain that Moses could 
 have written a history, first, of the an- 
 cestors of his race, if it were only from 
 the traditions which were sure to have 
 been preserved among them, and se- 
 condly, of their wars and their wan- 
 derings, in which he himself had been 
 their leader. ‘These wars and wander- 
 ings extended over a period of forty 
 years, during which there must have 
 been frequent and long intervals of com- 
 parative leisure, which would have af- 
 forded ample time, to a man of energy 
 and diligence, to compose a long and 
 elaborate work. We may add that, if 
 Moses could have written such a book, 
 then it is almost certain, that he would 
 have wished to do so. If we admit but 
 the barest outline of the history of the 
 Exodus, derivable not from the Jews 
 only, but confirmed by the adverse tra- 
 ditions of their enemies, there can be 
 no doubt of the following facts, viz. that 
 the Hebrews were an oppressed race 
 who, escaping from their captivity in 
 Egypt, made a settlement in the land 
 of Canaan, and by degrees grew into a 
 powerful people, having a code of laws 
 and a system of worship, markedly dis- 
 tinguishing and keeping them apart from 
 the nations round about them. Now 
 it is plain, that to fit such a people 
 to be their own masters, and to main- 
 tain themselves in a condition of civil 
 polity and social independence, there 
 were needed wise laws and good train- 
 ing. If there be any truth at all in 
 history and tradition, Moses, their wise 
 leader, gave them laws and subjected 
 them, before their settlement in Canaan, 
 to a system of training. Moreover, he 
 gave them a nationality. Was it not 
 almost certain that he would commit his 
 laws to writing? Is it not highly proba- 
 ble, that he should have tried to call out 
 their national spirit by giving them a 
 history of their ancestry and of their own 
 assertion of their national independence? 
 Such a body of men would not very 
 
 easily settle by conquest among people 
 more civilized than themselves, and re- 
 tain independent laws, customs and rites, 
 notwithstanding all surrounding influ- 
 ences. Yet that this was done by the 
 Israelites no scepticism has yet denied. 
 Nothing short of all that we read in the 
 Pentateuch can fully explain this. But, 
 at all events, it is clear, that in order to 
 effect it, a wise leader and legislator 
 would have committed his laws, and 
 very probably his history, to writing. 
 
 We conclude then, that Moses could 
 have written a work such as the Penta- 
 teuch, and that, if he could, most proba- 
 bly he would haye written such a work. 
 
 2. Our next position is, that Zhe 
 concurrent testimony of subsequent times 
 proves, that Moses did write the books 
 now known by his name. 
 
 Beginning with the earliest books of 
 the Old Testament we can trace a con- 
 stant stream of reference and quotation 
 to the laws, the history, and the words of 
 Moses, which shew them all to have been 
 well-known and universally accepted. 
 
 In Joshua, the Law of Moses, the 
 Book of the Law, which had been writ- 
 ten and was to be read, is continually 
 spoken of (Josh. i. 7, 8, viii. 31, 34, xxiii. 6), 
 In the first chapter the very words of 
 Deuteronomy are twice quoted at length 
 by Joshua. (See Josh. i. 3—8, where 
 Deut. x1. 24, 25, xxxi. 6—12 are recited, 
 and Josh. i. 13—18, where Deut. iii. 
 18—20 is recited). The constitution, 
 both ecclesiastical and temporal, of the 
 Israelitish people exactly corresponds 
 with that ordained by Moses. Thus the 
 priesthood is in the family of Aaron. 
 Eleazar, the son of Aaron, is High priest 
 (Josh. xiv. 1). He holds the same high 
 place in the nation that his father did, 
 being associated with Joshua, as Aaron 
 was with Moses (see xiv. I, xxi. 1). He 
 and Joshua divide the land (xxi. 1), ac- 
 cording to the ordinance in Num. xxxiy. 
 17. The tribe of Levi perform the sacred 
 functions, being scattered among the 
 tribes, with forty-eight cities assigned to 
 them (Josh. xili. 14, 33; xiv. 3, 43 XVill. 7; 
 xxi.), as had been commanded by the 
 Lord. by the hand of Moses (Num. xxxy, 
 
 7). 
 The Tabernacle, which had been made 
 by Moses and pitched in the wilderness, 
 
THE PENTATEUCH. 5 
 
 is now set up at Shiloh (Josh. xviii. 1). 
 The sacrifices (Josh. vill. 31, xxil. 23, 27, 
 29) are exactly those enjoined in Lev. 
 L,1i., i, The altar which Joshua builds 
 is constructed ‘‘as Moses the servant of 
 
 the Lorp commanded the children of 
 Israel, as it is written in the book of the 
 Law of Moses” (Josh. viii. 30,31. Cp. Ex. 
 xx. 25). The ark of the covenant occu- 
 pies the same position as it did in the 
 wilderness. It is carried on the shoulders 
 of the Levites, and considered as the 
 symbol and the special place of the pre- 
 sence of God (Josh. iil. 3, 6, 8, vil. 6). 
 Circumcision (v. 2) and the passover (v. 
 10) are observed as in the Pentateuch, 
 
 There is the same general assembly of 
 the people in council with the same 
 princes of the assembly (Josh. 1x. 18—21, 
 xx. 6, 9, Xxil. 30. Cp. Ex. xvi. 22, &c.), the 
 same elders of Israel (Josh. vii. 6; Deut. 
 Xxxl. 9), the same elders of the city 
 (Josh. xx: 4; Deut. xxv. 8), the same of- 
 ficers called shoterim and shophetim (Josh. 
 vill. 33; Deut. xvi. 8), the same ‘heads 
 of thousands (Josh. xxii. 21; Num. 1. 16), 
 and other functionaries of state or of 
 law. The ordinances of the Mosaic law 
 are adhered to. Thus the bodies of those 
 who have been hung are taken down 
 before sunset (Josh. viii. 29, x. 27), as it 
 was commanded in Deut. xxi. 23. No 
 league is made with the people of €a- 
 naan (Josh. ix.), according to Exod. xxii, 
 32. Cities of refuge are appointed (Josh. 
 xx.) in strict accordance with the rules 
 laid down in Num. xxxv. rr—15; Deut. 
 iv. 4I—43; xix. 2—7. The land is di- 
 vided by lot (Josh. xiv. 2), as enjoined 
 in Num. xxxiv. 13. The daughters of 
 Zelophehad have their inheritance given 
 them in the way prescribed Num. xxvii. 
 I—12, xxxvi. 6—9. 
 
 This is no place to discuss the genu- 
 ineness and antiquity of the Book of 
 Joshua; we may simply observe that its 
 testimony to the Pentateuch is such that 
 adverse criticism has found no escape 
 but in saying that the author of Joshua 
 must also have been the author of the 
 Pentateuch, or (perhaps avd) that the 
 Book of Joshua was a recent production 
 of the time of the kings or of the cap- 
 tivity. 
 
 The Book of Judges is of a somewhat 
 fragmentary character describing. a dis- 
 
 ordered condition of society, and the 
 nature of its history is such as to call 
 forth but few references to the history or 
 the laws of Moses. The Book, however, 
 appears in the first place to be a con- 
 tinuation of the history of Israel from 
 the death of Joshua, and so thoroughly 
 joins on to the Book of Joshua, that it 
 can hardly be explained except on the 
 belief that the Book of Joshua was writ- 
 ten before it (see ch. i: 1. sqq. ii. 6—8). 
 The laws of Moses, and God’s command- 
 ments by him, seem to be frequently re- 
 ferred to (see il. 1; 9, 3, 41, 12, 205 vi. 
 8-105 xe 6; 2,13..Cp.. Deut.x1.| 5 ; 
 xxii. 21). We find the same ordinances 
 of law and worship as are prescribed in 
 the Pentateuch and observed in Joshua. 
 Thus Judah has the pre-eminence among 
 
 ‘the tribes and the chief command (Judg. 
 
 1. 2; xx. 18, Cp. Gen. xlix. 8; Num. ii. 3, 
 x. 14). The office of Judge, which here 
 appears so conspicuously, corresponds 
 with what Moses had said in Deut. xvii. 
 9. ‘The Theocratic character of the na- 
 tion is fully recognized by Gideon, who 
 refuses to be king (Judg. viii, 22), in ac- 
 cordance with the sayings of Moses 
 (Ex. xix. 5, 63 Deut. xvii. 14, 203 xxxili. 
 5). The Tabernacle is still, as set up by 
 Joshua, at Shiloh (Judg. xvii. 31). In 
 
 case of danger we find the Israelites 
 
 going to ask counsel of the Lord, pro- 
 bably by the High priest with Urim and 
 Thummim (Judg. xx. 23. Cp. Ex. xxvii. 
 30; Num. xxvil. 21): and again after 
 defeat we find them going up to the 
 house of the Lord, weeping and fasting 
 
 and offering there burnt offerings and sa- 
 
 crifices in conformity with Deut. xii. 5 ; 
 
 there enquiring of the Lord by means of 
 
 Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son 
 of Aaron, the High priest, in the pre- 
 sence of the ark of the Covenant of God 
 (Judg. xx. 26—28), The Ephod is still 
 the priestly garment, and so honoured 
 as to become an object of idolatry (Judg. 
 Vill. 273 xvii. 53 xviii. 14—17). The 
 Levites, dispersed about the tribes and 
 cities, appear as the only legitimate mi- 
 nisters of religion, so that their services 
 are sought even for idolatrous worship 
 (Judg. xvii. 7—13; xix. 1, 2). Circum- 
 cision distinguishes the Israelite from 
 the neighbouring tribes (Judg. xiv. 3; 
 xv. 18), ous 
 
6 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 » 
 
 ‘There are numerous historical refer- 
 ences in Judges to the facts recorded 
 ‘in’ the Pentateuch (e.g. 1. 16, 20, 23; 
 ii, 1, 10; vi. 13). Especially Judg. xi. 
 -I5—-27 is a complete epitome of Num. 
 xx, xxl. The language is frequently bor- 
 rowed in great degree from the language 
 of the Pentateuch (compare Judg. i. 
 I—23 with Ex. xx. 5; xxxiv. 13; Lev. 
 XXVL. 13—17, 36; Num. xxxii. 13; Deut. 
 Wore e Ss; 163 4x) 18.5 -xiin gs Xviini2$)Xxxi- 
 16; and in the Song of Deborah, Judg. v. 
 compare vy. 4, 5 with Deut. xxxill. 2; 
 vs 8 with Deut. xxxu. 17. 
 
 >» In the unsettled. state of the country 
 during the reigns of most of the judges 
 it is only natural to expect that there 
 would be some departure from the strict 
 observance of the law: but the facts 
 above referred to are consistent only 
 -with the belief that the events and ordi- 
 nances of the Pentateuch had preceded 
 the history and were known to the actors 
 -and writers of the Book of Judges. 
 
 The History of Samuel. Here again 
 we meet from the first with the ordi- 
 nances of the Law and the history of 
 the Pentateuch, referred to, recognized 
 and acted on. 
 
 - We meet at once with Eli, the High 
 priest of the race of Aaron, though of 
 ‘the house of Ithamar (1 Chr. xxiv. 3. 
 Cp, 25. vil. 17; 1 K; i..27)3 and his 
 ‘sons’ wickedness is related with the threat 
 .of punishment,. fulfilled in the reign of 
 “Solomon (1 K. ii. 27), which sustains 
 ‘the truth of God’s promise (Num. xxv. 
 ‘10 sqq.) that the High priesthood 
 -Should remain in the family of Eleazar. 
 -The tabernacle is still at Shiloh, where 
 “it was: pitched by Joshua (1 S. ii. 14, 
 Av. 3), probably somewhat more solidly 
 -fxed than it, had been in the wilderness, 
 ‘perhaps according to the rabbinical tra- 
 ‘ditions having now become “a structure 
 ‘of low stone walls with the tent drawn 
 over the top” (Stanley ‘S. and P.’ p. 
 .233);.So0 that it had apparently a war- 
 ‘der’s house attached to it, where Samuel 
 -Slept’, The lamp burns in it according 
 
 1 The objection (Colenso, Pt. v. p. 97) that 
 the Tabernacle could not be the tabernacle of 
 the wilderness, because it had ‘‘a door,” 1 Sam. 
 ‘li. 22, is rather singular, if we observe that the 
 “words in Samuel on which the objection is found- 
 ed, ‘‘the women that assembled at the door of 
 
 to the ordinance in Exod. xxvii. 20, 213 
 Lev. xxiv. 2, 3; though either that ordi- 
 nance was not interpreted to mean that 
 the light might never go out, or the 
 carelessness, which had. come on in Eli’s 
 old age and in the disordered state of 
 Israel, had let that ordinance fall into 
 disuse. The ark of the covenant is in 
 the sanctuary and is esteemed the sacred 
 symbol of the presence of God (1 S. 
 lv. 3; 4, 18, 21,°223:¥)- 3994 Og 7 ae 
 The Cherubim are there, and the Lorp 
 of hosts is spoken of as dwelling between 
 the Cherubim (1 S. iv. 4). There is the 
 altar, and the incense, and the Ephod 
 worn by the High priest (1 S. ii. 28). 
 
 ‘The various kinds of Mosaic sacrifices 
 
 are referred to: the burnt-offering (O/a, 
 1S. x. .8;. ki. 9} xv. 62))) theme 
 burnt-offering (Cad/, 1 S. vu. 9. Comp. 
 Deut. xxxiii. 10), the peace-offerings (.She- 
 damim, 1 §.°x. 84) xi 15 Ree 
 Ex. xxiv 5), the bloody sacrifice (Ze- 
 bach, 1 S. i. 19), and the unbloody of- 
 fering (Minchah, 1 S. ii. 193 ili. 14; 
 xxvl. I9). The animals offered in sacri- 
 fice, the bullock (1S. i. 24, 25), the 
 lamb (1 S. vii. 9), the heifer (1 S. xvi. 2), 
 and the ram (1 S. xv. 22), are those pre- 
 scribed in the Levitical code. The es- 
 pecial customs of the sacrifice alluded 
 to in 1S. il. 13, were those prescribed 
 
 in Lev. vi. 6, 7; Num. xviii. 8—19, 25, 
 
 32; Deut. xviii. 1 sqq.: but the sons of 
 Eli knew not the Lord, and so would not 
 acknowledge the ordinance: (“‘ The sons 
 of Eli...knew not the Lord, nor the or- 
 dinance of the priests in reference to 
 the people,”.1 S, 11. 12, 13). The Le- 
 vites alone were permitted to handle the 
 sacred vessels and to convey the ark of 
 the Lord (1 S. vi. 15). Historical events 
 are referred to as related in the Penta- 
 teuch; Jacob’s going down to Egypt, 
 
 ‘the oppression of the people there and 
 
 their deliverance by the hand of Moses 
 and Aaron (1S. xii. 8), the plagues of 
 Egypt (1 S. iv. 8), and the wonders of 
 the Exodus (1 S. vi. 8), the kindness 
 
 the tabernacle of the congregation,” are literally 
 a quotation from Ex. xxxviii. 8, ‘the women as- 
 
 sembling, which assembled at the door of the 
 
 tabernacle of the congregation.” Of course the 
 word for ‘‘door” (MDB) is as applicable to a 
 tent door as to a house door; and is coristantly 
 used of the door of the tabernacle in the Pen- 
 
 -tateuch, 7 ate 
 
THE PENTATEUCH. : 
 
 shewn by the Kenites to Israel in the 
 wilderness (1 S. xv. 6). 
 
 Even verbal quotations from the Pen- 
 tateuch are pointed out. The refer- 
 ence in 1 S. il. 22 to Ex. xxxviil. 8, has 
 been already mentioned. ‘The people 
 ask them a king (1 S. vill. 5, 6), in 
 language which shews that they had 
 the very words of Moses (Deut. xvi. 
 14) .in their minds. ‘The words of 
 1 S. vill. 3 are evidently written with 
 allusion to Deut. xvi. 19. The only in- 
 consistencies which appear are readily 
 explicable by the peculiar, unsettled con- 
 dition of the nation in the days of 
 Samuel and the early days of David. 
 Especially when the ark was in captivity 
 and there was no longer the sacred pre- 
 sence of God at Shiloh, Samuel sanc- 
 tioned the offering of sacrifice in other 
 places beside the Tabernacle (1 S. vii. 
 17; x. 8; xvi. 2—5). But indeed the 
 command to sacrifice only in the place 
 to be chosen. by God was not binding 
 until that place had been chosen, viz. 
 Mount Zion, and the tabernacle, to be 
 succeeded by the Temple, had been set 
 up there. The difficulty that Samuel 
 a Levite (t Chron. vi. 22—28), but not 
 a priest, should be said to have sacri- 
 ficed (1S. ix. 13), is removed, if we con- 
 sider how frequently it is said of others, 
 of Joshua (vill. 30, 31), of Saul (1S. xiii. 
 9, 10), of David (2 S. xxiv. 25), of Solo- 
 mon (1 K. iii. 4), of the people (1 K. ii. 
 2), that they sacrificed, it being in all 
 these cases apparently understood that a 
 priest was present to offer the sacrifice 
 (see Deut. xvill. 3; 1S. i. 13; 1K. iii. 
 1—4. Comp. 1 Chron. xvi. 39, 40). 
 Samuel, as prophet and prince, blesses 
 the sacrifice (1 S. ix. 13): but there is 
 no evidence that he slew it. If he slew 
 it, still the man who brought the offer- 
 ing might slay it, but he could not sprin- 
 kle the blood on the altar. : 
 
 This is an important point in the his- 
 tory of Israel. Supposing Moses to have 
 been the: author of the Pentateuch and 
 the facts recorded in it to be historical, 
 we have now found just what we might 
 expect to find, The land of Canaan is 
 conquered by Joshua, the lieutenant and 
 successor of Moses, who endeavours to es- 
 tablish his people in their new settlements 
 by enforcing upon them. a strict observ- 
 
 Name. 
 
 Samuel. 
 
 a forger. 
 ‘much of- the Mosaic element to do with- 
 
 ance of all the ordinances of thé Mosaie 
 Law. After his death, and even during 
 his failing years, we find the Israelites 
 demoralized by long wars, settling im- 
 perfectly down to their civil duties and 
 institutions, acknowledging, .and:in the 
 main, both ecclesiastically and politically, 
 guided by the laws of the’ Pentateuch, 
 
 yet without a strong and settled goverm 
 ment to enforce their strict and constant 
 observance. Samuel, prophet, judge, and 
 almost priest, becomes at length the chief 
 ruler. He consistently aims at consoli- 
 dating and reforming the state of society. 
 
 To this end, though he apparently makes 
 no change in the established worship of 
 the country, which had not widely de- 
 parted from that ordained by Moses, yet 
 
 he strives to bring all the ordinances 
 
 both of Church and State back to:con- 
 formity with the mstitutions of the Pen- 
 tateuch. This is pretty certain, either 
 
 that he followed these institutions or that 
 he invented them. The only record we 
 
 have of him and of his acts’ is to be 
 found in the first book called ,by his 
 There certainly he appears as a 
 follower not as an inventor; and the 
 Book of Judges, which most of the mo- 
 
 _dern critics admit to be ancient,. testifies 
 to the existence and authority (though 
 _at times to the popular neglect) of these 
 
 ordinances, as much as do the books of 
 The reason, why he is charged 
 with the invention, is that after him the 
 main facts of the history and the prin- 
 
 cipal laws of the Pentateuch weré un- 
 
 doubtedly known, and there is the ut- 
 
 most anxiety on the part of the objectors 
 
 to prove that they had not been known 
 before. But, besides what we shall en- 
 deavout .to shéw presently, viz. that 
 Samuel could-not except by a miracle 
 have invented the institutions of the 
 Law, ‘the history of Samuel :is: wholly 
 inconsistent with the theory that he was 
 ‘In: his- history there: is too 
 
 out:Moses and the Pentateuch, there is 
 too little to betray his intention to bring 
 the system into prominence.” (Smith, 
 ‘Pentateuch,’ 1, p. 172.) ‘The Penta- 
 
 teuch and the Mosaic system silently 
 
 underlie the whole history of Samuel ; 
 but, in the midst of.a general subjection 
 to it, there are at-least some apparent 
 
8 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 departures from it, which are utterly in- 
 consistent with the belief that Samuel 
 was its forger. It is there: but it is 
 there without parade or observation. 
 
 The times of David and Solomon. 
 
 It is perhaps scarcely necessary to 
 trace minutely the references to the 
 Pentateuch, and the observance of the 
 Law of Moses through these reigns. The 
 facts are the same as before; the Levi- 
 tical priesthood, the tabernacle, the ark, 
 the sacrifices, all are the same; but there 
 are two things to be observed now, which 
 bring us fresh evidence of the exist- 
 ence of, and the respect paid to, the 
 Pentateuch, and of the acceptance by 
 the nation of the ordinances of the Taber- 
 nacle. 
 
 1. In David we have not only a 
 king but an author. A large number of 
 the Psalms are assignable to him, either 
 ‘as their author or as their compiler. 
 Now it is true; that the later Psalms 
 (such as the 78th, rosth, ro6th, 136th) 
 are much fuller of historical references to 
 the Exodus than the earlier Psalms, the 
 ‘Psalms of David: but it will be found 
 that the passing allusions, and the simi- 
 larity of expressions and sentences, a- 
 mounting sometimes to evident quota- 
 tions, are far more abundant in the 
 Psalms of David. It is impossible to 
 compare the following, even in the Eng- 
 lish Version (but in the Hebrew it is 
 much more apparent), without being con- 
 -vinced that David had in his mind the 
 ‘words or the thoughts of the author of 
 the Pentateuch. 
 
 Pss 1... 
 
 os -AX~-5 4 eb. 6). 
 ea » 6 (Heb. 7). 
 oop. 3all. 6, 7,8. 
 
 “Gen. XXxIx. 3, 23. 
 “Deut. xxxili. 19. 
 Num. vi. 26. 
 Gen. 1. 26, 28. 
 
 Sees it E 2s Gen. ix. 5. 
 
 her X8~5> Ex, xxil.25, Lev. xxv. 
 | 36.° Bx. xxin, 8. 
 ! Deut. xvi. 19. 
 pin Ae Ex. xxiii. 13. 
 ET Deut. xxxil. g. 
 
 op eV Lager Deut. xxxil. 10. 
 
 wap oats Ex. xix.5. Deut. x. 14. 
 
 - 59 XXVL 6, Ex. XxX. 19, 20. 
 
 », xxx. Heading. Deut. xx. 5. 
 
 bpp,  MEXIKE Qe ys 7 DOV XEVe BSE tL 
 
 & 
 
 Ps, Ixviil. Num. x. 35. 
 Deut. xxxili. 26. 
 
 Ex. xiii. 21. 
 
 ” ” Ex. xx. 26. 
 
 ” ” 17. Deut. XXXIIL. 2. 
 > 1xKXxvi. 8. EX, XV.eIIy 
 
 ” ” 15. Ex. Xxxly. 6. 
 
 5p (Clie 07, a8. 
 
 Ex. xx.6. Deut.vil. 9. 
 Gen. xiv. 18. . 
 EX. KXE125, 39. 
 
 ov CXS 
 > CXXXIL 2, 
 
 2. In Solomon we have also a royal 
 author. His language, however, is not 
 so much penetrated with the language of 
 the Pentateuch as is that of David. In- 
 deed the nature of his writings, which are 
 mostly proverbs or apophthegms, does 
 not admit of much reference to earlier 
 works. Yet, even so, where the subject 
 leads to it, we may trace an evident ac- 
 quaintance with the language of Moses. 
 See for instance the third chapter of 
 Proverbs, where v. 3 appears to allude to 
 Ex. xxii. 9, Deut. vi. 1; v. 9 to Ex. xxii. 
 29, Deut. xxvi. 2; v. 12 to Deut. viil. 5; 
 y. 18 to Gen. ii. 9. Many other phrases 
 in the Proverbs are borrowed directly 
 from the Pentateuch. Thus in Prov.x. 18, 
 “ He that uttereth slander,” is a Hebrew 
 phrase of peculiar significance occurring 
 only here and Num. xiii. 32; xiv. 36, 37; 
 the expressions in Prov. x. 1; xx. I0, 23, 
 are taken from the very words of Lev. 
 xix. 36; Deut. xxv. 13. The words of 
 xi. 13; xx. 19, “the talebearer” (literally 
 “he that walketh being a talebearer”), 
 ate taken from Lev. xix. 16, “Thou shalt 
 not go up and down as a talebearer,” 
 lit. “Thou shalt not walk being a tale- 
 bearer.” 
 
 But that which specially connects 
 Solomon with the history of the Exodus, 
 is that he was the builder of the Temple. 
 Now the Temple is a fixed and enlarged 
 Tabernacle. All the proportions of the 
 Tabernacle are carefully retained, but 
 the size is exactly doubled. All the 
 instruments and the sacred vessels are 
 the same, except that they are magnified. 
 Nothing material is altered, except that 
 the Temple is a structure of stone, whilst 
 the Tabernacle was a tent covered with 
 skin; and in the Temple there is mag- 
 nificence, whereas in the ‘Tabernacle, 
 notwithstanding the gold and embroid- 
 ery, there was comparative simplicity.. - 
 
THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 Mr Fergusson, the able writer of the 
 article Zemp/e in Smith’s ‘Dict. of the 
 Bible, has shewn with great clearness, 
 that the proportions and construction of 
 the Tabernacle were those of a tent, 
 most admirably suited for its purpose in 
 the wilderness, having every requisite 
 which a Tent-temple ought to have. It 
 is a strong proof of the reverence in 
 which Solomon held the original pattern, 
 that he and his architects should have 
 so closely imitated the Tent in their 
 erection of a stone Temple. Unless the 
 Tent and all its accompaniments had 
 existed and been described, the Temple 
 of Solomon would have: been almost 
 impossible. No one would have thought 
 of building a house with all the propor- 
 tions of a tent, except to perpetuate the 
 relation of the house to the tent, the Tem- 
 ple’s ancestral rights in the Tabernacle. 
 In the words of Ewald, “The Temple of 
 Solomon itself, notwithstanding all its 
 splendour and its expanded proportions, 
 shews itself to be only a tent on a large 
 scale, though no longer portable.” 
 
 a 
 
 The divided kingdom. 
 
 . After the separation of the ten tribes 
 from Judah, though the worship of the 
 true God was preserved only in Judah, 
 and idolatry prevailed in Israel, there is 
 still evidence that in both kingdoms the 
 Pentateuch was acknowledged, both as a 
 history and a law. In Judah, we find 
 “the Book of the Law of the Lord” 
 used as the great text-book for teaching 
 the people in the reign of Jehoshaphat 
 (2 Chron. xvii. 9). In another reign the 
 king, Uzziah, ventures to offer incense 
 contrary to the Law (Num. xvi. I sqq.), 
 and he is stricken with leprosy as a 
 punishment (2 Chron. xxvi. 16—21). 
 Hezekiah, a great reformer in Judah, 
 institutes all his reforms on principles 
 strictly according with the law of the 
 . Pentateuch, and is specially noted as 
 having “kept all the commandments, 
 which the Lord commanded Moses.” 
 2 K. xviii. 6. To his day had descended 
 ‘that venerable relic of the wilderness 
 “the brazen serpent which Moses had 
 made.” ‘The honour paid to it clearly 
 proves the acceptance of its history by the 
 Jewish people; but, because, that honour 
 
 9 
 had then become excessive, Hezekiah 
 in his ardent zeal for purity of worship 
 brake it in pieces, 2 K. xviii. 4: We 
 turn to the kingdom of Israel. Jeroboam 
 is warned by Ahijah the Prophet that he 
 should keep the statutes and command- 
 ments of God (1 K. xi. 38), evidently the 
 well-known statutes and commandments 
 of the law. When, instead of doing so, 
 he seduces the people to idolatry, it is 
 still with reference to the history of the 
 Exodus, “ Behold thy gods, O Israel, 
 which brought thee up out of the land of 
 Egypt,” 1 K. xii. 28. The very place of 
 his worship, Bethel, was probably con- 
 secrated by the history of Jacob and the 
 appearance of God to him there. The 
 feast appointed 1 K. xii. 32, was an 
 imitation of the feast of ‘Tabernacles. 
 Though it was “in a month devised in 
 his own heart” (v. 33), and not at the 
 time decreed in the Law, yet it was 
 “like unto the feast that is in Judah,” 
 and ordained on purpose to prevent the 
 people from going up “to the sacrifice in 
 the house of the Lord at Jerusalem” 
 (v. 27).. The Levites appear to have 
 remained faithful, and hence Jeroboam 
 is obliged to make the lowest of the 
 people priests (v. 31). We have here 
 the clearest testimony to the existence 
 and authority of the Law even in the 
 description of the most flagrant breach 
 of it. 
 
 For the history of the succeeding 
 reigns it may suffice to point attention to 
 the following references in the books of 
 Kings to the laws of the Pentateuch. 
 
 1 K.xxi.3 to Lev. xxv. 23; Num. xxxvi.8. 
 »» XXl. 10 to Num. xxxv. 30; Deut. xvii. 
 6; %5 xix. 15: 
 5 xxii. 17 to Num. xxvii. 16, 17. 
 2K. ii. 20 to Ex. xxix. 38 sqq. 
 3) IVE, iotodLevexxve39 &c. 
 9 Yi..tS) to Genv xix, 11. 
 » Vil. 3 to Lev. xiii. 46; Num. v. 3. 
 
 y 
 / 
 
 But at one period in this history we 
 find a body of illustrious prophets warn- 
 ing the people both of Judah and of 
 Israel or Samaria. Isaiah, Hosea, Amos 
 and Micah, all prophesied during the 
 reigns or part of the reigns of Uzziah, 
 Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of 
 Judah. Isaiah’s prophecy was confined 
 to Judah, but Amos and Micah pro- 
 
Io 
 
 phesied in both kingdoms, and Hosea 
 wholly or chiefly in the kingdom of 
 Israel. 
 
 In all these prophets there are fre- 
 quent references to the Law, which three 
 of them distinctly name (Is. v. 24; xxx. 
 9; Hos. iv. 6; viii. 1; Amos ii. 4), Isaiah 
 seems to speak of it as “the Book” (ch. 
 XX1X. 12), just as Moses himself speaks of 
 his own record as “the Book” (Ex. xvi. 
 14, see above). ‘The familiarity of this 
 great prophet and probably of his hearers 
 with the Pentateuch may be seen by 
 comparing Is. 1. ro—14 with Ex. XXXIV. 
 24; Lev. il. 1,16; vi. 14, 15 } XXill. passim. 
 Stuy. XXXL, with Deut. xvii. 16; Is. iii. 
 14 with Exod. xxij. 5, 26; Is. v. 26 with 
 Deut. xxviil. 49; Is, xxx. 16, 17 with Lev. 
 xxvi. 8; Deut. xxxil. 30, &c. 
 
 It is, however, more important for our 
 present purpose to pass on to the other 
 three prophets, as they prophesied in 
 Israel, and so their references will shew, 
 that the Pentateuch, whether as Law or 
 as history, was assumed as the basis of 
 truth even in appeals to the apostate and 
 idolatrous kingdom of Ephraim. 
 
 In Hosea we have such references 
 as these, “They have transgressed the 
 covenant like Adam” (not “like men” as 
 Authorized Version), Hos..vi. 7. Jacob 
 ‘took his brother by the heel in the 
 womb, and by his strength he had power 
 with God: yea, he had power over the 
 angel and prevailed, he wept and made 
 supplication unto him: he found him in 
 Bethel” &c. (Hos. xii. 3, 4, the allusions 
 ‘being to Gen. xxv. 26; xxvill. 11; Xxxil. 
 24). ‘She shall sing there, as in the days 
 of her youth, and as in the day when she 
 came out of the land of Egypt”. (ii. 15). 
 ‘‘When Israel was a child, then I loved 
 him, and called my son out of Egypt” (x1. 
 I, cp. Ex. iv, 22, 23). “I have: written 
 to him the great things of my law” 
 vile). 
 
 Amos says, «] brought -you up from 
 the land. of Egypt, and led you forty 
 years through the wilderness, to possess 
 the land of the Amorite,” (ii. 10, the last 
 words being in allusion to Gen. xv. 16), 
 “the whole family which I brought up 
 from the land of Egypt” (ii. 1), He 
 ‘speaks of “the horns of the altar” (iii. 14), 
 in allusion to Ex, xxvil. 2, xxx. 10, and 
 Lev. iv. 7. He speaks of the Nazarites 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 (ii. 11, 12), which doubtless sprang out 
 of the ordinance in Num. vi. 1—21: 
 In chap. iv. 4, 5 he writes, “ Come 
 to Bethel, and transgress; at Gilgal mul- 
 tiply transgression; and bring your sacri- 
 fices every morning, and your tithes after 
 three years: and offer a sacrifice of 
 thanksgiving with leaven, and proclaim 
 and publish the freewill offerings. "ee L reseé 
 allusions shew an intimate acquaintance 
 with many of the Levitical Laws. One 
 is to the continual burnt-offering, Num. 
 xxviii. Another to the tithe to be laid 
 up at the end of three years, Deut. xiv. 
 28; xxvi. 13. A third to the prohibition 
 to burn leaven with a meat-offering (Lev. 
 ii. 11), and the exception made in the 
 case of a thank-offering, where direction 
 is given to offer besides the unleavened 
 cakes also an offering of /eavened bread 
 (Lev. vil. 12, 13). A fourth allusion is 
 to the freewill offering mentioned Lev. 
 xxl. 18—21; Deut. xii. 6. Indeed the 
 accuracy of agreement in this one pas- 
 sage goes far to prove that the law of 
 which Amos speaks was identical with 
 that which we now possess’. 
 
 Micah refers to Genesis. ‘* They shall 
 lick the dust like ¢4e serpent” (W132) (vii. 
 17), in allusion to Gen, i. 14. He 
 mentions the promises to Abraham and 
 to Jacob (vil. 20). He alludes to the 
 history of the Exodus and of the book 
 of Numbers. “I brought thee up out 
 of the land of Egypt, and redeemed thee 
 out of the house of servants; and I sent 
 before thee Moses, Aaron, and Miriam. 
 O my people, remember now what Balak 
 king of Moab consulted, and what Balaam 
 the son of Beor answered him,” &c. (vi 
 
 4, 5). 
 
 Is it possible that these prophets, thus 
 speaking, or the. people among whom 
 they spoke, should not have had eS 
 Books of Moses before them ? 
 
 The reign of Josiah. 
 
 We come now to the time of Josiah. 
 In his reign we have abundant evidence 
 that the ordinances observed, when the 
 temple had been purified, were those of 
 the Mosaic Law. The Passover was then 
 held unto the Lord God, as it was written 
 
 1 McCaul, ‘Examination of Bp. Colenso’s 
 Difficulties,’ p, 183, third Edition, 1863. ° 
 
THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 -in the book of the Covenant (2 K. xxiii.), 
 
 “according to the word of the Lord by the 
 hand of Moses” (2 Chron. xxxv. 6). The 
 14th day of the first month is the day 
 appointed (2 Chr. xxxv. 1). The sacri- 
 fices are Mosaic (2 Chr. xxxv. 7—10). 
 The priests assisted by the Levites kill 
 the Passover and sprinkle the blood 
 (Ib. v. rr). The priests are the sons of 
 Aaron (v. 14). The custom of the Pass- 
 over is traced from the time of Samuel 
 to that of Josiah (v, 18), &c., &c. 
 
 But in this reign we meet with that 
 remarkable eyent, the finding of the Book 
 of the Law in the Temple by Hilkiah 
 the High priest. It is unnecessary to 
 determine here what may be meant by 
 “the book of the Law” (2 K. xxii. 8), or “a 
 book of the Law of the Lord by Moses” 
 (2 Chr. xxxiv. 14). Whether it were the 
 whole Pentateuch, or Deuteronomy only, 
 or portions of the whole, has been often 
 questioned. Itseemshowever pretty clear, 
 that Deuteronomy was at least a portion 
 of the book thus found. The curses 
 referred to in 2 Chr. xxxiv. 24, are 
 either those in Lev. xxvi. or those in 
 Deut. xxvil. xxviii. The effect which 
 they produce upon the king, and his 
 evident conviction that they concern 
 -himself especially, “‘for me, and for the 
 people,.and for all Judah,” (2 K. xxi. 
 13), seem to point to the curses in Deu- 
 teronomy; as there only the king is 
 ‘threatened (Deut. xxvill. 36), there too 
 the judgments denounced seem more spe- 
 cially national, and such as would most 
 ‘signally apply to the condition of Judah 
 in the days of Josiah. 
 
 But it is a natural question, Whence 
 came it that the book thus found should 
 so have awakened the conscience and 
 aroused the anxieties of the king, if the 
 Pentateuch had all along been the ‘ac- 
 ‘knowledged statute book of his people, 
 and the text book of their faith? 
 ~ Let us then notice first, that the Law 
 was to be kept carefully in the Taber- 
 macle or Temple. Moses commanded 
 that the book of the law, which he had 
 awritten, should be put in the side of the 
 ark of the covenant and there preserved 
 (Deut. xxxi. 26). It is extremely pro- 
 able (the language seems to imply it) 
 that the very autograph of Moses was 
 thus stored up, first in the Tabernacle 
 
 and afterwards in the Temple. 
 
 TE 
 
 We, who 
 have manuscripts of the New Testament 
 in the fullest preservation 14 or 15 cen- 
 turies old, and Egyptian papyri, some 
 unquestionably much older than Moses 
 still legible, others written in the 14th 
 century B. Cc. in perfect preservation, need 
 not wonder if this treasured MS. of the 
 Pentateuch had lasted from Moses to 
 Josiah, a period of only 700 years, and 
 that in the dry climate of Palestine. Let 
 
 ‘us next observe the long prevalence of 
 
 idolatry and ungodliness in the reigns 
 preceding that of Josiah. There is a 
 ray of light in the reign of Hezekiah, 
 but the darkness settles down again more 
 thickly than ever in the reign of his son 
 Manasseh. ‘That reign, extending over 
 more than half a century (2 K. xxi. 1), 
 witnessed the greatest spread of idolatry, 
 and of all the vices which accompanied 
 idolatry in Palestine, the most cruel per- 
 secution of the faithful, and the most 
 outrageous profanation of the sanctuary 
 ever known in Israel. Manasseh built 
 the high places and reared up altars for 
 Baal; he built idolatrous altars in the 
 courts of the temple, made his sons to 
 pass through fire, dealt with wizards, and 
 even set up a graven image, probably of 
 the foulest possible character, ‘‘in the 
 
 house of which the Lord said to David 
 
 and to Solomon his son, In this house 
 and in Jerusalem......... will I put my 
 name for ever” (vv. 3—7, 2 Chr. xxxili. 7), 
 Thus he seduced the people “‘to do more 
 evil than did the nations whom the Lord 
 destroyed before the children of Israel” 
 (v. 9). Moreover Manasseh shed inno- 
 cent blood very much, till he had filled 
 Jerusalem from one end to another” (v. 16; 
 also Joseph. ‘Ant.’ x. 3, 1). There was no 
 doubt a short season of repentance at 
 the end of his reign (2 Chron. xxxill. 12 
 sqq.) in which the idol was taken from 
 the Temple and the altar of the Lord 
 repaired; but his son Amon succeeded, 
 and again did evil in the sight of the 
 Lord, and served the idols which his 
 father served, and worshipped them 
 (2 K. xxi. 19, sq). To these two evil 
 reigns and to a long inheritance of cor- 
 
 ruption, Josiah succeeded at eight years of 
 
 age. He early shewed his piety, even 
 from the age of sixteen turning to the 
 Lord, and at the age of twenty com- 
 
I2 
 
 mencing the purification of worship (2 
 Chr. xxxiv. 3). At the age of 26 (the 
 18th of his reign) the book of the Law 
 was found by Hilkiah in the Temple(2 K. 
 xxli. 3). The ark which had been re- 
 moved from the Temple (2 Chr. xxxv. 3) 
 during the sacrilegious reign of Manasseh, 
 had been brought back again: and wher- 
 ever the book of the Law may have been 
 concealed, very likely built into a wall 
 by the priests to keep it from the hand 
 of the spoiler, it was now brought to 
 light again by the High priest Hilkiah. 
 Let us remember then, Ist, that very 
 probably this was the autograph of Moses; 
 2ndly, that since the reign of Hezekiah, 
 a period of seventy-five years, it is very 
 unlikely that any king should have made 
 a copy of the law, as commanded in 
 Deuteronomy (xvii. 18); moreover it is 
 very likely that Hezekiah’s copy should 
 have been destroyed or laid aside and 
 forgotten ; 3rdly, that by a cruel persecu- 
 tion idolatrous worship had long been 
 upheld, and the worshippers of the Lord 
 prohibited from exercising or teaching 
 their faith; the prophets having been 
 silenced, Isaiah according to Jewish tra- 
 dition having been sawn asunder eafly in 
 Manasseh’s reign; 4thly, that Josiah was 
 still young and only feeling his way to 
 truth and to the restoration of religion. 
 We shall then not think it strange that 
 he should have been ignorant of much 
 of the purport of the Pentateuch, nor 
 that when the book, pefhaps written by 
 the very hand of Moses under the direc- 
 tion of God, was brought out and read 
 to him, he should have been deeply im- 
 pressed by its burning words, seeming to 
 come straight into his soul as if they had 
 been sent down to him from the cloud 
 and the tempest and the mountain which 
 burned with fire. Writing in those early 
 days was very scarce; reading was proba- 
 bly confined to very few. In the middle 
 ages of Europe, if it were possible to 
 conceive such a state of corruption as 
 that in the reign of Manasseh over- 
 spreading any Christian nation, it would 
 not have been impossible for a young 
 king to be ignorant of the contents of 
 the Scriptures of the New Testament. 
 Yet there can be no period of Christian 
 history in which copies of the Scriptures 
 were not far more abundant in .every 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 Christian country in Europe, and the 
 power of reading them far more gene- 
 ral, than can have been the case in Pa- 
 lestine at any time before the captivity. 
 There is nothing then to astonish us 
 in the effect produced on Josiah by the 
 reading of the threats of judgment from 
 the Temple copy of the Law. That it was 
 the Temple copy of the Law, all the most 
 
 competent witnesses were satisfied. The 
 
 High priest, the Scribes, Huldah the 
 Prophetess (see 2 K. xxii. 8, 12, 14), the 
 elders of the people (ch. xxiii. 1), the 
 priests and Levites (xxiii. 4), those to 
 whom some knowledge at least of the 
 past had come down, some acquaintance 
 with the Scriptures must have remained, 
 all apparently acknowledged that the 
 book found was the book of the Law by 
 the hand of Moses. Had it been possi- 
 ble that a forger should then for the first 
 time have produced it, it cannot be that 
 sO many independent witnesses should 
 have been imposed upon to receive it. 
 The story of its finding is told simply 
 and without parade. It is what might 
 very easily have happened, for it is like 
 enough that the book would have been 
 hidden, and Josiah’s repairing of the 
 Temple would bring it to light. The 
 effect produced on Josiah’s pious mind is 
 exactly what might have been looked 
 for. But, that, under all the circum- 
 stances of long continued corruption and 
 apostasy, any one should have been able 
 to impose such a work and such a law, 
 as the Pentateuch, on king, priests, elders 
 and people, even if any one at that time 
 could possibly have written it, exceeds 
 all power of credence. 
 
 The Captivity and the Return. 
 
 The Prophets of the Captivity ac- 
 knowledge the Law, and refer to the 
 Pentateuch as much as any of those 
 that preceded them. Jeremiah began to 
 prophesy in the 13th year of the reign 
 of Josiah. ‘The portion of his book from 
 ch. 1. 1 to ch. vill. 17, is generally ac- 
 knowledged to have been written before 
 the finding of the Book of the Law by 
 Hilkiah; but in those chapters there are 
 statements concerning the Law and quo- 
 tations from the books of Moses, which 
 shew that Jeremiah was then well ac- 
 
THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 quainted with the Pentateuch, “They 
 that handle the Law know me not” (Jer. 
 ii, 8). “How say ye, We are wise, and 
 the Law of the Lord is with us?” (vii. 8). 
 Here we have the common mode of re- 
 ferring to the Law, as a well-known au- 
 thority. Chap. 11. 6 has allusions to Deut. 
 viii. 15 ; Numb. xiv. 7,8; Lev. xviii. 25— 
 28; Numb. xxxv. 33, 34. Again, ch. ii. 
 28 is a quotation from Deut. xxxil. 37, 
 38. Chap. iv. 4 is a virtual quotation 
 from Deut. x. 16, xxx. 6; and the figure 
 used occurs nowhere else in the Scrip- 
 tures. Ch. v. 15, 17 contains unmis- 
 takeable quotations from Deut. xxviii. 
 31, 49. It is of less importance to mul- 
 tiply examples of this kind, because it is 
 now admitted that the writings of Jere- 
 miah are throughout impregnated with 
 the language of Deuteronomy, insomuch 
 that the modern critics have argued from 
 this that Jeremiah must himself have 
 been the Deuteronomist. 
 
 Ezekiel prophesied during the cap- 
 tivity. Dr M‘Caul has observed that in 
 the one short passage (Ezek. xxii. 7—12), 
 there are at least twenty-nine references 
 to, or rather quotations from, Exodus, 
 Leviticus, and Deuteronomy, perceptible 
 in the English version, and which the 
 marginal references in an ordinary Bible 
 sufficiently point out, but which by con- 
 sulting the original will be found to con- 
 tain the very words of the Hebrew. In 
 v. 26 again, where the Law is distinctly 
 named, there are at least four more re- 
 ferences to Lev. x. 10, xi: 45, xx. 25, 
 Ex. xxxi. 13. Chapters xviii. and xx. con- 
 tain references and quotations innumer- 
 able; ch. xx. being a recapitulation of 
 all that happened in the wilderness’. 
 
 ~ On the return from captivity we learn, 
 that at the Feast of Tabernacles (accord- 
 ing to the ordinance in Deut. xxxi. 10 
 —13), Ezra brought the book of the Law 
 of Moses, which the Lord had command- 
 ed Israel, that he read it from morning till 
 midday “before the men and the women, 
 and those that could understand; and 
 the ears of all the people were attentive 
 unto the book of the Law” (Neh. viii. 3). 
 That they accepted it against their own 
 interests and affections is evident from 
 their being induced to put away their hea- 
 
 1 M‘Caul’s ‘Examination of Bp. Colenso’s 
 Difficulties,’ pp. 163 sqq. 
 
 {3 
 
 then wives (see Ezra, ch. x). Some of them 
 it is plain, understood the book as it was 
 read to them; but to some of them, we 
 are told, Jeshua, with the Levites and 
 others, “read in the book of the Law 
 distinctly (or rather ‘giving an explana- 
 tion’), and caused them to understand 
 the reading” (Neh. viii. 7,8). The older 
 men and women, no doubt, retained their 
 knowledge of the ancient Hebrew, but 
 the younger men, who were grandchil- 
 dren or great-grandchildren of those who 
 were first carried captive, had almost lost 
 the language of their forefathers, and had 
 broughtfrom the land of the Chaldees that 
 Aramaic tongue, Chaldee or Syriac, which 
 soon became the vernacular language of 
 Judea. Hebrew was not quite lost, or 
 Haggai and Malachi would not have writ- 
 ten their prophecies in Hebrew; but the: 
 change was rapidly taking place. It is 
 the constant Jewish tradition that Ezra 
 (besides writing Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, 
 and 1 and 2 Chronicles) collected and 
 reduced to order all the earlier books of 
 the Old Testament. It is said, moreover, 
 that ‘“‘the reading distinctly the Law and 
 causing the people to understand,” re- 
 ferred to above, was the introduction by 
 Ezra of the custom, which prevailed 
 afterwards, of having Chaldee translations 
 or paraphrases read with the Hebrew 
 Scriptures, for the use of the Chaldee 
 speaking Jews. It is also said, that it 
 was Ezra who transcribed the Scriptures 
 from the ancient Hebrew character (now 
 known as Samaritan) into the modern 
 Hebrew or Chaldee character. Whether 
 or not Ezra did all this, it certainly was 
 done no verylong time after the captivity ; 
 and Ezra, who was “‘a ready scribe in the 
 Law of Moses,” who bore a high commis- 
 sion to restore the Temple and the wor- 
 ship of God, was the most likely person to 
 have been intrusted with this great work. 
 
 However this may be, we are brought 
 now to a new kind of testimony. The 
 Pentateuch, as preserved by the Jews, 
 has come down to us in the modern . 
 Hebrew or Chaldee character. It was 
 known to the ancient Jews and to the 
 Christian fathers, that there was also a 
 copy of the Pentateuch preserved by the 
 Samaritans in a different character. For 
 a thousand years that Samaritan Penta- 
 teuch was lost to the Christian Church, 
 
14 
 
 and it was almost doubted whether it 
 had ever existed; but in the year 1616, 
 Pietro della Valle obtained a complete 
 MS. of it from the Samaritans in Da- 
 mascus. Several other copies have since 
 been discovered, one of which is be- 
 lieved to be of the most remote anti- 
 quity. 
 being the principal exception) this Sama- 
 ritan Pentateuch agrees with the Jewish 
 Pentateuch. There can have been no 
 collusion between Jews and Samaritans, 
 for they were at mortal feud: and there 
 are but two periods in which we can 
 suppose the Samaritans to have become 
 possessed of this copy of the Penta- 
 teuch, Manasseh, brother of the High 
 priest Jaddua, being expelled from his 
 priesthood for marrying the daughter of 
 Sanballat the Horonite (Neh. xii. 28), 
 became the first High priest of the Sama- 
 ritans and of the temple erected on 
 Mount Gerizim. He was joined by many 
 priests and Levites, who, like himself, 
 refused to put away their heathen wives’, 
 It is the belief of many, that the so- 
 called Samaritan Pentateuch was carried 
 by these priests from Jerusalem to Sa- 
 maria, Now they would certainly not 
 have taken it with them, testifying as 
 it did against their heathen marriages 
 and their schismatical worship, had they 
 not fully believed in its genuineness and 
 Divine authority : nor would the Samari- 
 tans have accepted it but for a like 
 conviction on their parts, At all events, 
 at no later period could the Hebrew 
 Scriptures have been imposed on the 
 dissentient Samaritans, This document 
 therefore preserved in Samaria by the 
 Samaritans is an independent witness, 
 from at least the time of Ezra, to the 
 integrity of the five books of Moses, 
 Its witness may go back to a much 
 earlier date; for many think, and that 
 with much ground of reason, that the 
 Pentateuch was carried to the Cuthites 
 who had peopled Samaria by that Is- 
 raelitish priest, who was sent by Esar- 
 haddon, that he might teach them the 
 worship of the Lord. (See 2 K, xvii, 28; 
 Ezra iv. 2.) This if it be correct would 
 carry back the independent testimony of 
 the Samaritan Pentateuch not only to 
 the time of Ezra but to the reign of 
 
 ? Joseph, # Ant.’ x3. 8, §§ 2, 4, 
 
 In- almost all particulars (dates: 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 Manasseh, the grandfather of: Josiah, 
 about B.C. 680, 
 
 We pass on to the translation into 
 Greek of B:c. 280, the famous translation 
 of the LXX, which has a remarkable re- 
 semblance to the text of the Samaritan 
 Pentateuch, and which proves the accept-: 
 ance of the Pentateuch by the Jews in. 
 Egypt. Another link in the chain is the 
 First Book of Maccabees, where we read 
 of the fury of Antiochus Epiphanes, who. 
 strove to destroy the books of the Law, 
 and of the zeal of the priests and peo- 
 ple, who chose rather to die than to. 
 submit to his cruel edicts (1 Macc. i. 56. 
 sqq.) The books of the Apocrypha per-. 
 petually refer to and quote the Penta-. 
 teuch. Ecclesiasticus especially (perhaps. 
 the most ancient and most important) is 
 full of such references, (See for instance 
 ch. xvi. 8, 10; xvii, I—4.) 
 
 That Chaldee paraphrases were made 
 very soon after the return from captivity. 
 we are well assured. The earliest which 
 is extant is that of Onkelos; the date of. 
 which is uncertain, by some placed in 
 the century before our Saviour, but most 
 probably to be referred to a date nearly 
 coincident with the earthly life of Christ. 
 The Targum of Onkelos is a paraphrase 
 of the Pentateuch as we have it now, 
 These Targums had been in use long 
 before they were written down. When 
 writing was comparatively scarce, the 
 memory was so exercised, that a Targum 
 on the Pentateuch would easily be hand- 
 ed down memoriter, so that probably the 
 Targum of Onkelos really represents that 
 which is much more ancient than itself. 
 
 Lastly, we come to the ew TZesta- 
 ment itsejf. As our purpose is to trace. 
 evidence, rather than to adduce autho- 
 rity, it may be sufficient here to say 
 that, wherever the Pentateuch is refer- 
 red to by the Apostles or by the Lord. 
 Himself, its Mosaic origin, as well as 
 its Divine authority, is clearly expressed 
 or implied, (See for instance, Matt, xix, 
 8; Mark x, 5; xu. 26; Luke xx, 373 
 Joh, Lally) S4Ny7 40,475 vail 53 Acta ui: 
 22; vil. 37. sqq. &c. &c.). 
 
 The chain then is unbroken Bas the: 
 books of Joshua and Judges to the New 
 Testament, and the words of Jesus. 
 Christ. We may fairly ask, whether any 
 
 _ book, ancient or modern, has such a. 
 
‘THE. PENTATEUCH, 
 
 stream of concurrent and credible testi- 
 mony in support of its claims to genuine- 
 ness and authenticity, 
 
 3. The third point to be proved is, 
 
 - That the internal evidence points to 
 Moses and to him only as the writer of 
 the Pentateuch. 
 
 (x) The author of the Pentateuch and 
 
 the giver of the Levitical Law had 
 an intimate acquaintance with Egypt, 
 its literature, its laws and its religion. 
 This is a wide subject, and one which 
 branches out into numerous details. 
 It can only be briefly touched on 
 here.: Spencer (‘de Legibus Hebreo- 
 rum’) shewed at great length that no 
 one could have invented the Laws of 
 Moses who was not well skilled in 
 Egyptian learning. Bryant (‘On the 
 Plagues of Egypt’) has shewn how the 
 plagues were but an.extension and accu- 
 mulation of the natural evils of the 
 country intensified by the Divine. Judg- 
 ment. Hengstenberg (‘Egypt and the 
 Books of. Moses’) has shewn how tho- 
 roughly an acquaintance with Egypt per- 
 meates the whole Pentateuch, This will 
 appear in the following pages, when we 
 come to the history of Joseph, to the 
 Exodus, and to the laws of Moses. It 
 would be impossible to enter into all the 
 details here. Let us take a very few. 
 - The making of bricks among the 
 Egyptians by captives is pourtrayed on 
 the monuments, especially of the 18th 
 dynasty (most probably the dynasty of 
 the Exodus) in such close conformity 
 with the language of the Book of Exodus 
 L143 v. 7, 8, 18, that the one might 
 seem to be a description of the other 
 (see Brugsch, ‘ Hist. d’Egypte,’ p. 106). 
 ** Ruins of great brick buildings are found 
 throughout Egypt” (Rosellini). ‘The 
 use of crude bricks baked in the sun 
 was universal in Egypt” (Wilkinson, II. 
 p..96, Hengst. p. 2). Bricks were made 
 in Egypt under the direction of the king, 
 as may appear by the impressions found 
 on some of them. And in the composi- 
 tion of the Egyptian bricks there is gene-. 
 rally found a certain quantity of chop- 
 ped straw (Hengst. p. 79). 
 
 The ark of papyrus smeared with bitu- 
 men in which Moses was exposed, Ex. ii. 
 3, is suited to Egypt and Egypt only. 
 There only was papyrus employed in the 
 
 manufacture of many articles, such as 
 mats, baskets, sandals (Herod. 11. 37), 
 sails for ships (Herod. 11. 96), and even 
 boats; for according to Plutarch (‘De 
 Is. et Osiri’) Isis was borne upon a boat 
 of papyrus.- Bitumen too was of great 
 use in Egypt. It was one of the chief 
 ingredients in embalming; and mummy- 
 shaped figures are found covered with a 
 coating of bitumen (Hengstenb. p. 85). 
 
 The plagues of Egypt may be seen 
 either in Bryant (passim) or Hengsten- 
 berg (p. 103—125), to be the natural 
 troubles of the country magnified, their 
 miraculous character resulting from their 
 appearance and accumulation at the word 
 of Moses and their removal at his 
 prayer. 
 
 The Mosaic laws and institutions of 
 worship are penetrated throughout by a 
 knowledge of Egyptian. customs. 
 
 The.connection between the cherubic 
 figures overshadowing the mercy seat and 
 the Egyptian sculptures is traced in the 
 note at end of Gen. iii. infra. 
 
 The distinction of clean and un- 
 clean meats is eminently Levitical, but 
 it is eminently Egyptian also (Heng- 
 stenb. p. 180 sqq.). The Egyptian priest- 
 hood was by inheritance (Herod. 11, 
 37); so was the Levitical. The Egyp- 
 tian priests shaved their whole bodies 
 (Herod. ib.); so the Levites were to 
 ‘shave all their flesh” (Num. viii. 7). 
 The Egyptian priests had to bathe con- 
 tinually (Herod. ib.); so the priests and 
 Levites had to purify themselves by 
 bathing (Ex. xl. r2—15, Num, viii. 7). 
 The priests of Egypt wore none but 
 linen garments (Herod. ib.), so was it 
 with the Israelitish priests (Ex, xxviii. 39 
 —42; Xxxix. 27, 28; Lev. vi. 10): and 
 there is no known example of any other 
 priesthood of-antiquity clothed only in 
 linen (Hengst. p. 145—149). The anoint-: 
 ing of Aaron (Lev. vill. 7—12, 30) when 
 clothed in his priestly robes has an ex- 
 act parallel in the Egyptian sculptures, 
 where the king is anointed, clothed in 
 royal robes and with cap and crown on 
 his head (Wilkinson, 1 P27 53 Smith on 
 
 . the ‘ Pentateuch,’ p. 295). 
 
 -The ceremony of the scapegoat, where 
 the priest confesses the sins of the people 
 on the head of the goat, which is then 
 sent away-into. the. wilderness, finds a, 
 
16 
 
 parallel in what Herodotus tells us, viz. 
 that the Egyptians heaped curses on the 
 head of the victim and then carried it 
 and sold it to Greek traders, or, if there 
 were no Greeks among them, threw it 
 into the river (Herod. II. 39). 
 
 The Urim and Thummim (Ex. xxviii. 
 
 30) on the breastplate of the High priest 
 correspond with what we learn from 
 fElian (‘ Var. Hist.’ lib. xiv. c. 34) and 
 Diodorus (lib. xxxI. c. 75), as also from 
 the monuments, that the chief. priest 
 among the Egyptians, when acting the 
 part of judge, wore round his neck an 
 image of sapphire, which was called 
 Truth (Hengstenb. p. 149—153). 
 _ The writing of the commandments of 
 God on the door-posts and gates (Deut. 
 xi. 20) is in strict accordance with the 
 drawings of Egyptian architecture, where 
 the door-posts of temples and tombs are 
 covered with hieroglyphics (Smith, ‘ Pen- 
 tateuch,’ I. p. 257). 
 
 The erecting pillars and coating them 
 with plaster to prepare for inscriptions 
 (Deut. xxvii. 2, 3) is in strict conformity 
 with Egyptian custom (Hengst. p. 90). 
 
 The infliction of the bastinado as pre- 
 scribed in Deut. xxv. 2, is graphically 
 illustrated in the sculptures at Beni Has- 
 san (Smith, p. 258). The ox treading out 
 the corn unmuzzled (Deut. xxv. 4) was 
 the custom in Egypt, as the monuments 
 also prove (Smith, ib., Hengst. p. 223). 
 The offerings for the dead forbidden in 
 Deut. xxvi. 14, are evidently such as were 
 prevalent in Egypt, where small tables 
 were placed in the tombs, bearing offer- 
 ings of ducks, cakes and the like (Smith, 
 ib.). 
 
 These are a few of the parallels, which 
 prove an intimate acquaintance with the 
 customs of Egypt in him who wrote the 
 Pentateuch and delivered the Mosaic 
 Law. 
 
 (2) The history and the Law of the 
 Israelites both bear marks and tokens 
 of their passage through the wilderness, 
 and long residence in it. 
 
 This is specially to be observed con- 
 cerning the Tabernacle. “ It is proved,” 
 says Ewald, ‘‘to have been derived from 
 the early times of the wanderings. It 
 was only the most sacred of the many 
 tents of a migratory people, resembling 
 the general’s tent in the midst of a camp; 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 and according to the minute descriptions 
 of it, all the objects belonging to it were 
 adapted for carrying, like those of an 
 ordinary tent’.” 
 
 The memory of their long dwell- 
 ing in tents was preserved among the 
 Israelites throughout their generations. 
 Not only was the feast of Tabernacles 
 observed from the time of Moses to that 
 of Christ, but their language and monu- 
 ments continually bore witness to the 
 same. ‘The very words ‘camps’ and 
 ‘tents’ remained long after they had 
 ceased to be literally applicable. The 
 ‘tents of the Lord’ were in the pre- 
 cincts of the temple. The cry of sedi- 
 tion, evidently handed down from ancient 
 times was, ‘To your tents, O Israel!’ 
 ‘Without the camp’ (Heb. xiii. 13) was 
 the expression applied to the very latest 
 eyents of Jerusalem. ‘Thou that dwell- 
 est between the Cherubim, shine forth ! 
 Before Ephraim, Benjamin and Manas- 
 seh, stir up Thy strength, and come, 
 and help us’ (Ps. Ixxx. 1)... We see 
 in this the reflected image of the an- 
 cient march, when the ark of God went 
 forth, the pillar of fire shining high 
 above it, surrounded by the warrior tribes 
 of Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasseh’,.” 
 The elders or chiefs of the tribes corre- 
 spond with the Sheykhs of the desert, 
 the office never disappears in the history 
 of the people, till out of the Sheykhs of 
 the desert grew the elders of the syna- 
 gogues*. The materials which are re- 
 corded as used in the construction of 
 the Tabernacle and its vessels were such 
 as could be best obtained in the desert. 
 The ark was not made “of oak, the 
 usual wood of Palestine, nor of cedar, 
 the usual wood employed in Palestine 
 for sacred purposes, but of shzttim or 
 acacia, a tree of rare growth in Syria, 
 but the most frequent, not even except- 
 ing the palm, in the peninsula of Sinai*.” 
 The coverings of the Tabernacle were 
 goat’s hair and ram-skin dyed red after 
 the Arabian fashion, seal-skin (Zachash, 
 see Gesen. s. v.) from the adjoiming 
 gulfs of the Red Sea, and fine linen from 
 the Egyptian spoils®. Even the distinc- 
 
 1 Ewald, Translated by Martineau, p. 441. 
 ~2 Stanley, ‘ Jewish Church,’ I. p. 163. 
 
 3 Tbid. p. 161, 4 Ibid. p. 163. 
 
 5 Ibid. p. 165. 
 
THE. PENTATEUCH. 
 
 tion of the different kinds of food per- 
 mitted or forbidden in the Law “may be 
 traced with the greatest probability to 
 the peculiarities of the condition of Is- 
 rael at the time of the giving of that 
 Law. - The animals of which they might 
 freely eat were those that belonged espe- 
 cially to their pastoral state—the ox, the 
 sheep, the goat, to which were added 
 the various classes of the chamois and ga- 
 zelle. As we read the detailed permis- 
 sion to eat every class of what may be 
 called the game of the wilderness, ‘the 
 wild goat and the roe and the red deer 
 and the ibex and the antelope and the 
 chamois,’ a new aspect is suddenly pre- 
 sented to us of a large part of the life of 
 the Israelites in the desert. It reveals 
 them to us as a nation of hunters, it 
 shews them to us clambering over the 
 smooth rocks, scaling the rugged pinna- 
 cles of Sinai, as the Arab chamois hunters 
 of the present day, with bows and arrows 
 instead of guns. Such pursuits they could 
 only in a limited degree have followed 
 in their own country. The permission, 
 the perplexity implied in the permission, 
 could only have arisen in a place where 
 the animals in question abounded’.” The 
 inevitable conclusion is, that the: Law 
 had its origin in, and the Legislator was 
 intimately acquainted with, the wilder- 
 ness of Sinai. 
 
 (3) Thirdly, the language and the 
 legislation of the Pentateuch has Canaan 
 only in prospect. It is patent through- 
 out that the wording, both of the laws 
 and of the language of the lawgiver, looks 
 forward to a future in Canaan. See 
 Ex, xii. 25-27; Xill. I. 53 XXlll. 20—33; 
 femivels, Lev. Xivr34; XVI. 3, 24; XIX. 
 @auenne 225 XXiil. 10;-xxv, 2; Num. xv. 
 2, 18; xxxiv. 2; xxxv. 2—34; Deut. iv. 
 Pee ton vil, 13 1X;-15 xu. 10, &c. 
 
 It has been objected, that the writer of 
 the Pentateuch knew too much of the 
 geography of Palestine for one who had 
 never been there, and that this is an 
 argument against its Mosaic origin. This 
 surely cannot be a valid objection, when 
 we remember, first, that Moses with his 
 knowledge of the history of Genesis and 
 of the wanderings of the old Patriarchs, 
 
 1 Ibid. pp. 168, 169. See the same subject 
 further discussed, Smith’s ‘ Pentateuch,’ pp. 285 
 sqq. 
 
 VoL. I. 
 
 x7 
 
 must have become familiarized with the 
 geography of the land of these wander- 
 ings; secondly, that Palestine was well 
 known to the Egyptians, who repeatedly 
 traversed it from the reign of Thothmes I.; 
 thirdly, that Moses had lived for forty 
 years in the wilderness of Sinai feed- 
 ing the flocks of Jethro, and with -his 
 active mind and his deep interest in the 
 country of his forefathers, he was sure to 
 have enquired about, most probably even 
 to have visited, the neighbouring plains 
 of Palestine ; fourthly, that he had taken 
 pains to ascertain all the character of 
 the country, of its people, its cities and 
 its fortresses by means of spies, and that 
 probably for many years, as every wise 
 general would do, when preparing to 
 invade a hostile and powerful people. 
 But the very prophecies, which speak so 
 clearly of the future possession of Ca- 
 naan, and which sceptical criticism will 
 therefore have to be predictions after the 
 event, are just such as would not have 
 been written when the event had become 
 known. ‘Take for instance Deut. xii. 10, 
 “When ye go over Jordan, and dwell in 
 the land which the Lord your God giveth 
 you to inherit, and when He giveth you 
 rest from all your enemies round about, 
 so that ye dwell in safety,” &c. This 
 prophecy is indeed referred to in Josh. 
 Xxill, 1, and is spoken of there as though 
 it had been fulfilled in the conquests of 
 Joshua. Yet, when we consider how 
 partially those conquests really gave rest 
 to Israel, how the sins of the people con- 
 ditioned and, as it were, impaired their ful- 
 filment, how long it was before the words 
 were proved to be true indeed, it will be 
 hardly possible to find any time when a 
 forger could have written them. For in- 
 stance, could Samuel have written them, 
 with the history of the Book of Judges, a 
 record eminently of unrest and insecurity, 
 before his eyes, himself judging Israel, 
 with the ark of the covenant in the 
 hands of the Philistines, and to. be suc- 
 ceeded in his Judgeship by the warlike 
 and turbulent reign of Saul? Indeed 
 the reign of Solomon is the one only 
 reign in the whole history of Israel, in 
 which we witness anything like an united 
 people with a wide dominion and with 
 peace from the neighbouring tribes. That 
 reign was 500 years after the Exodus. 
 B 
 
18 
 
 Would any skilful forger have put words 
 into the mouth of Moses apparently pro- 
 mising, immediately on the conquest of 
 Canaan, rest and peace and security, 
 when it took 500 years of restless and 
 often unsuccessful war to attain security, 
 and even so, when the very next reign 
 saw the nation rent by an incurable 
 schism ? 
 
 We conclude, that, as the Pentateuch 
 bears all the traces on its brow of Egypt 
 and of the Desert, so also it must have 
 had its origin before the occupation of 
 Canaan. 
 
 (4) The language of the Pentateuch 
 is such as to suit the age and character 
 of Moses. The language is undoubted- 
 ly archaic. There are several words and 
 forms to be found in the Pentateuch, 
 and to be found nowhere else’. 
 
 It is argued indeed, that these are not 
 so much archaisms as peculiarities; but 
 it is very singular that they should per- 
 vade the Pentateuch, which has, till of 
 late, been universally esteemed the most 
 ancient portion of the Bible, and that 
 they should be unknown in the other 
 books, even in those connected with the 
 writers who have been fixed on as pro- 
 
 1 The most familiar and undoubted are the 
 following : 
 
 (a) The Pronoun of the third person singular, 
 except as pointed by the Masoretic Jews, has no 
 variety of gender. Everywhere else we have 
 N17 (400) for *‘he,” and NT (Zee) for “she.” 
 In the Pentateuch we have NIM doing equal 
 duty for both. 
 
 (8) In like manner “WI (zangar), ‘‘a youth,” 
 is common to both genders in the Pentateuch, 
 meaning indifferently ‘‘boy” or ‘‘ girl.” In all 
 other books “Yl (xangar) is ‘a boy,” but 
 MWA (xangarah) is ‘a girl.” 
 
 (vy). Then we have ON, ‘‘these,” constantly 
 for ndx, the later form. We have the infinitive 
 of verbs in ending in 4 instead of Ni}, as 
 WY, Gen. xxxi. 28; JMNWY, Ex. xviii. 18; TN, 
 Gen. xlviii. rr. So the third person plural preet. 
 ee ends in }) instead of the later form 
 in }. 
 (6) We have words peculiar to the Penta- 
 teuch, as JAN, ‘‘an ear of corn;” NODS, 
 ‘fa sack ;” Ia, ‘‘a piece,” and N32 to ‘divide 
 into pieces;” 213, “fa young bird;” Tat, ‘a 
 present,” and ‘tit, ‘‘to present ;” wiNIn, 2 
 sickle;” N20, ‘‘a basket;” DIP, ‘a sub- 
 stance, an existing thing ;” a¥3 (for v3.9), a 
 lamb ;” MDI, ‘a veil;” WY (for WY), ‘a city ;” 
 "XW, ‘a blood relation.” 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 bable forgers of the Pentateuch, such as 
 Samuel or Jeremiah. 
 
 It is argued again, that the language 
 of the Pentateuch, although in some few 
 fragments (such as Gen. iv. 23, 24, Xiv. 
 Gen. xlix. &c.) apparently archaic, is for 
 the most part too like to later Hebrew 
 for us to believe that it came from Moses. 
 To this it may be replied that this is 
 really what we might expect. A language 
 is fixed by its great, and especially by its 
 popular, authors. It is commonly said, 
 that English has been fixed by Shakspeare 
 and the translators of the Bible. Moses, 
 putting aside all question of inspiration, 
 was a man of extraordinary powers and 
 opportunity. If he was not divinely 
 guided and inspired, as all Christians 
 believe, he must have been even a greater 
 genius than he has been generally reck- 
 oned. He had had the highest culti- 
 vation possible in one of Egypt’s most 
 enlightened times; and, after his early 
 training in science and literature, he had 
 lived the contemplative life of a shepherd 
 in Midian. We find him then, with a 
 full consciousness of his heavenly mis- 
 sion, coming forth as legislator, historian, 
 poet, as well as prince and prophet. 
 Such a man could not but mould the 
 tongue of his people. To them he was 
 Homer, Solon, and Thucydides, all in 
 one. Every one that knew anything of 
 letters must have known the books of 
 the Pentateuch. All Hebrew literature, 
 as far as we know, was in ancient times 
 of a sacred character, at all events no 
 other has come down to us; and it is 
 certain that writers on sacred subjects 
 would have been deeply imbued with the 
 language and the thoughts of the books 
 of Moses. Eastern languages, like east- 
 ern manners, are slow of change; and 
 there is certainly nothing strange in our 
 finding that in the thousand years from 
 Moses to Malachi, the same tongue was 
 spoken and the same words intelligible ; 
 especially in books treating on the same 
 subjects, and where the earlier books 
 must have been the constant study of 
 all the writers down to the very last. It 
 is said, on the authority of Freytag, that 
 the inhabitants of Mecca still speak the 
 pure language of the Koran, written 1200 
 years ago. Egyptian papyri, with an 
 interval of 1000 years between them, 
 
THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 are said by Egyptologists to exhibit no 
 change of language or of grammar’. We 
 must not reason about such nations as 
 the Israelites, with their comparative iso- 
 lation and fixedness, from the Exodus to 
 the captivity, on the same principles as 
 we should think of the peoples of mo- 
 dern Europe, where so many elements 
 of change have conspired to alter and 
 to mould their language and their lite- 
 rature. The language of the Pentateuch 
 then is just what the language of Moses 
 would probably have been, simple, for- 
 cible, with archaic forms and expres- 
 sions, but, having formed and stamped 
 all future language, still readily intelligi- 
 ble to the last. 
 
 Question of Post-Mosate Authorship. 
 
 Having now seen that so many notes, 
 both external and internal, combine to 
 point out Moses as the author of the 
 Pentateuch, let us enquire whether all 
 or any of them belong to any later prince 
 or prophet. 
 
 Joshua may perhaps have been em- 
 ployed by Moses to assist him in his 
 writings, as he was employed to assist 
 him in his wars; and, of course, Joshua 
 had some of the experience of Moses 
 and all the teaching which Moses could 
 give him. Yet nothing points to Joshua 
 as the writer of the Pentateuch. He was 
 eminently a man of war in his early and 
 middle life, and in his old age he had 
 enough and more than enough to do in 
 holding his people in their obedience to 
 the laws. 
 
 Samuel was a prophet and a reformer, 
 but he is nowhere presented to us as 
 a legislator; especially it is impossible 
 that Samuel, except by a miracle, could 
 
 1 See Brugsch, ‘Revue Archéologique,’ 1867, 
 September, p. 179: ‘‘In comparing the demotic 
 papyrus (which Brugsch translates) with the 
 romance of the two brothers, even a superficial 
 examination shows not only that the language 
 and the formule in the two papyri, separated 
 from each other by an interval of some thousand 
 years, are of the same kind; but also, a point of 
 most special interest, even the grammar has not 
 undergone the least change.” It may be added 
 that between the papyrus of the two brothers, 
 written under the 3rd king of the 19th dynasty, 
 and the earliest inscriptions and papyri at least 
 1000 years earlier, there is nearly the same iden- 
 tity of language, 
 
 7 
 
 have written books which are so thick set 
 with indications of a knowledge of Egypt, 
 and a knowledge of Sinai. The laws of 
 Moses bear the mark of Egypt from end 
 to end; but Samuel could never have 
 come into contact with Egypt at all: 
 and indeed, as far as history shews us, 
 the Israelites from Joshua to Samuel 
 were utterly isolated from contact with 
 any, except the Canaanites and Philis- 
 tines, who were mixed up with them, 
 spread all around them, and with whom 
 they were at constant war. 
 
 David is as little likely as Samuel to 
 have had time for composing the Penta- 
 teuch or drawing up its sanctions. He 
 was a man of war, and though the dar- 
 ling and the hero of his people, yet by 
 no means exercising that kind of control 
 and influence, which is needful for one 
 who would impose a new code of civil 
 and religious laws. 
 
 Solomon is the first who appears to 
 have had much intercourse with Egypt 
 after the time of the Exodus, and his 
 extensive and comparatively peaceful 
 reign may appear more suited to the 
 introduction of a new code of legislation 
 than the reigns of any of his predeces- 
 sors or successors. We have seen, how- 
 ever, how Solomon in his building of the 
 Temple followed the pattern of the Ta- 
 bernacle. ‘The reverse process, though 
 it has been suggested, is simply impos- 
 sible’. His whole organization indeed 
 proceeds on the basis of the Pentateuch. 
 But his own history is the clearest proof, 
 that he was not the author of the laws 
 contained in it, or the history related in 
 it. In his earlier days we find him a 
 pious and a wise king. He follows out 
 the intentions of his father, and builds a 
 temple to succeed the old tabernacle of 
 the wilderness. But, as he advances in 
 years, he is spoiled by the wealth and 
 luxury, which his power has_ brought 
 around him. He multiplies wives and 
 lapses into idolatry, a sad instance of 
 one hardened by the deceitfulness of sin, 
 
 1 Js it conceivable that Solomon, about to 
 build a Temple to be the glory of his nation and 
 for the special honour of his God, would have 
 constructed it in fashion like a tent of the desert, 
 in order that it might fit into the story of the 
 desert wanderings and the sacred tabernacle 
 carried through the desert? 
 
 B2 
 
20 INTRODUCTION TO 
 and so falling from the living God, Can 
 we conceive the author, or even the chief 
 compiler and enlarger, of the laws and 
 ordinances of the Mosaic code and wor- 
 ship, so carefully and so wisely framed to 
 guard against the seductions of idol wor- 
 ship, being himself the first to fall away 
 under those seductions? 
 
 But after the time of Solomon, the 
 possibility of the Pentateuch having 
 been written, and thus the laws of Mo- 
 ses enforced, becomes less and less. The 
 schism of the ten tribes constituted 
 a second kingdom, and the testimony, 
 not of one only, but of two nations, 
 would have been raised against such an 
 attempt. It is impossible to believe, that 
 in any subsequent reign such a book as 
 the Pentateuch, and such a code as that 
 of the Levitical law, with all its strict- 
 ness and the heayy burden of its ob- 
 servances, should have been imposed 
 upon the kingdom of Judah, either whilst 
 the ten tribes were still living in their 
 own land, or after they had been carried 
 captive to Assyria, and a remnant only 
 remained in Samaria. That the like 
 should have been attempted after the 
 return from captivity is even more im- 
 possible, and perhaps is not asserted by 
 any one. The Hebrew language was then 
 dying out, Chaldee rapidly taking its 
 place; and the classic simplicity of the 
 Pentateuch could not have had its origin 
 in the last days of the degeneracy of ian- 
 guage and literature. 
 
 It must be borne in mind, that any 
 . man or succession of men, attempting to 
 write or even extensively to rearrange 
 and enlarge such a book as the Penta- 
 teuch, must have set to work in the most 
 diligent and systematic manner to do so. 
 
 THE PENTATEOGR. 
 
 It has been shewn, that from end to 
 end the Pentateuch and the laws of the 
 Pentateuch have deeply imbedded in 
 their words and thoughts ancient Egypt 
 and ancient Sinai. A forger or redactor 
 could only have exhibited such a phe- — 
 nomenon by devoting himself with the 
 utmost care and attention to the study 
 of Egyptian customs and antiquities, and 
 to an acquaintance with the Sinaitic pen- 
 insula; and that too on the spot, in the 
 midst of those very countries. Nothing 
 less could have enabled him to produce 
 such a work. He must have studied 
 this with the most deliberate purpose, 
 and must have brought his study to bear 
 with the most consummate skill. Where 
 in the times of Samuel, Solomon, Heze- 
 kiah, Josiah, or Ezra, can we look for 
 such aman? And beyond this, if modern 
 critical theories be true, we must look 
 not for one wise head and skilful hand, 
 that should have produced such a re- 
 sult: but the fabric must have grown 
 up bit by bit; an Elohist first, then a 
 first, second, third, fourth, or even more 
 Jehovists, who dovetailed their respective 
 stories and their laws of many colours 
 one into another, making a thing of: 
 shreds and patches, which nevertheless, 
 when compacted together, has command- 
 ed the wonder of all ages, and every por- 
 tion of which has the same archaic cha- 
 racter, the same familiarity with the 
 Egypt of early dynasties, the same air of 
 the desert, the same apparent impress of 
 the great master’s hand. Such a result, 
 under the conditions of Jewish history, is 
 inconceivable as the work of any man; 
 
 but it is such as the wildest fancy cannot 
 
 attribute to an indefinite and widely 
 separated succession of many men. 
 
GalN Eeoils. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 PAGE PAGE 
 
 Document Hypothesis . ‘ : oteSs Meaning and antiquity of the name 
 Unity of plan and purpose throughout . 22 JEHOVAH, with further reference 
 Division of book into Toledoth 22 to Exod. vi. 2,3 : : a 2G 
 Of the names of God, as used in Genesis 24 Elohistic and Jehovistic passages 28 
 
 a — — Exod. vi.2,3 25 Alleged inconsistency with modern 
 Proper names compounded with JAH. 26 Science : i 29 
 
 F it be once admitted that the Pen- 
 
 tateuch, as a whole, is due to Moses, 
 there can be ho difficulty in admitting 
 that Geriesis, the most ancient part of 
 the Pentatetich, is due to him. If he 
 wrote the history of the Exodus, he, 
 either as author or compiler, must have 
 written the introductory history of the 
 times of the patriarchs. The unity of- 
 design is very manifest throughout. Moses 
 was employed to mould and form a 
 simple and previously enslaved people 
 into an organized nation. He had to 
 give them a code of laws, civil and ec- 
 clesiastical, for the guidance of their na- 
 tional life. The infant people was to be a 
 theocracy, the germ and embryo of a 
 theocracy greater than itself, guarded 
 and isolated for fifteen centuries, till by 
 a new revolution it should expand into 
 the Church of Christ. It was obvious 
 therefore, that he, who had to write the 
 earliest chapters of its history, should 
 begin by tracing down its descent from 
 those who had from the first been the 
 depositaries and witnesses of the truth. 
 
 If, however, adverse criticism has been 
 busy in trying to dislocate al! portions of 
 the Pentateuch, to disprove its unity, 
 and so to shake the evidence for its 
 Mosaic origin ; it has been signally busy 
 in so dealing with Genesis. If Moses 
 
 wrote the later books, he certainly wrote 
 Genesis; and on the other hand, if he 
 did not write Genesis, he wrote nothing. 
 Hence to shake the foundation of Gen- 
 esis is to destroy the fabric of the Penta- 
 teuch. The progress of the criticism has 
 been sufficiently gradual. It was sug- 
 gested long since by Vitringa, that Moses 
 may have had before him ‘‘ documents 
 of various kinds coming down from the 
 times of the patriarchs and preserved 
 among the Israelites, which he collected, 
 reduced to order, worked up, and where 
 needful, filled in,” schedas et serinia pa- 
 trum, apud Israelitas conservata, Mosem 
 collegisse, digessisse, ornasse, et ubt deficie- 
 bant, complesse (‘ Obs, Sac.’ 1. c. 4). A 
 conjecture of this kind was neither un- 
 natural nor irreverent. It is very pro- 
 bable that, either in writing or by oral 
 delivery, the Israelites possessed tradi- 
 tions handed down from their forefathers. 
 It is consistent with the wisdom of Moses, 
 and not inconsistent with his Divine in- 
 spiration, that he should have preserved 
 and incorporated with his own work all 
 such traditions, written or oral, as had 
 upon them the stamp of truth. 
 
 The next step in the theory was, that 
 taken by Astruc in 1753, who taught, 
 that the names of God (Elohim and 
 JEHOVAH), occurring in the book of Gen- 
 
22) 
 
 esis may distinguish respectively the do- 
 cuments or memoirs from. which Moses 
 compiled his history. He believed that 
 there were no fewer than twelve docu- 
 ments, the two chief being the Elohistic 
 and the Jehovistic. 
 
 Later writers again have varied this 
 theory with every possible variation ; 
 some believing that there was one Elo- 
 hist, and one Jehovist document; others 
 that there were more than one Elohist, 
 and many Jehovists; and exercising a 
 subtle ingenuity, most convincing at least 
 to themselves, they have traced minutely 
 the transitions from one document to 
 another, sometimes even in the midst of 
 a sentence, guided by some catchword 
 or form of expression, which they have, 
 as others think most arbitrarily, assigned 
 to the first or second Elohist, to the first, 
 second, third, or fourth Jehovist, accord- 
 ing to the number of authors in which 
 they respectively believe’, Another step 
 has been to suggest, that the different 
 documents, often, as it is alleged, giving 
 different versions of the same story, have 
 been carelessly and clumsily put toge- 
 ther. And a further still has been to 
 deny, that Moses could be either the 
 Elohist, the Jehovist, or the compiler 
 and redactor, it being evident that the 
 whole was a later work, due perhaps to 
 Samuel, perhaps to Hilkiah or Jeremiah, 
 perhaps still later to Ezra or some sur- 
 vivor from the captivity, or possibly to 
 a collection of the labours, the piously 
 fraudulent labours, of them all. 
 
 The salient points in their arguments 
 are these. ‘There appear to be two ver- 
 sions of the history of the creation, the 
 first from Gen 1. 1 to Gen. 11. 3, in which 
 only the name Elohim occurs, the other 
 from Gen. ii. onwards, in which the 
 name of JEHOVAH occurs in combination 
 with Elohim. Again, there appear two 
 accounts of the Flood, which though in- 
 terlaced in the book of Genesis, may be 
 disentangled. These also are charac- 
 terized respectively by the same variety 
 in thenames of God. Similar phenomena 
 are said to prevail throughout the book, 
 
 1 An abstract of the different theories from 
 Astruc to the present day may be seen in Haver- 
 nick (‘Int. to Pent.’ p. 45, Translation, Clark, 
 Edinburgh), and ‘Aids to Faith,’ M‘Caul’s 
 Essay on ‘ Mosaic Record of Creation,’ p. 191. 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 and even throughout the Pentateuch, but 
 these are the two most observable. Then 
 comes the well-known passage in Ex. 
 vi. 3, where the Most High says to Moses 
 that He was known to the fathers by the 
 name of El-Shaddai, but by the name JE- 
 HOVAH He was not known to them; 
 whence the introduction of the name 
 Jehovah in the history of Adam, Noah, 
 Abraham, &c., is argued to be a proof of 
 later authorship. 
 
 It may be well then to shew: 
 
 First, that the Book of Genesis is not 
 an ill-digested collection of fragmentary 
 documents, but a carefully arranged nar- 
 rative with entire unity of purpose and 
 plan. 
 
 Secondly, that the use of the names of 
 God is neither arbitrary nor accidental, 
 but consistent throughout with the Mo- 
 saic authorship, and the general scope of 
 the history, 
 
 1, Unity of plan and purpose through- 
 out. 
 
 First then, as to the organic structure 
 of the book, though it may be somewhat 
 obscured by the modern division into 
 chapters and verses, as it was of old by 
 the Jewish division of the Pentateuch 
 into Zerashim or sections; careful exami- 
 nation will shew, that the arrangement is 
 methodical and orderly from first to last. 
 
 The book begins with a general intro- 
 duction, from ch.i. 1 to ch. ii. 3, wherein 
 the creation of the universe is related in 
 language of simple grandeur, very possi- 
 bly in words handed down from the re- 
 motest antiquity, than which none could 
 be more fitted here for the use of the 
 sacred historian. 
 
 After this the book consists of a series 
 of Zbledoth, or genealogical histories, the 
 first of which is called “ the Toledoth of 
 the heavens and the earth,” ch. 11. 4; the 
 others being the respective histories of 
 the different families of man, especially 
 of the ancestors of the people of Israel, 
 from Adam to the death of Joseph’. The 
 
 ? The word Toledgth has by some been ren- 
 dered ‘‘ origins,” as ‘‘ generations” cannot pro- 
 perly be used of the creation of heaven and 
 
 earth; but it is not necessary to drop the figuras 
 
 tive language in a translation, By an easy meta- 
 phor, the word, which described well the family 
 history of a race of men, was applied to the 
 history of the material creation. The word, 
 moreover, as used in Genesis, does not mean a 
 
THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 
 
 great divisions of the book will be found 
 to be: 
 
 1. The Introduction, from ch. i. 1 to 
 ch.’ 1. 3. 
 
 2. “The generations of the heavens 
 and the earth,” beginning with ch. li. 4, 
 and extending on through the history of 
 the fall to the birth of Seth, ch. iv. 
 
 “The book of the generations of 
 Adam,” from ch. v. to vi. 8. 
 
 4. “The generations of Noah,” giving 
 the history of Noah’s family till his death, 
 from vi. 9 to end of ix. 
 
 5. “The generations of the sons of 
 Noah,” giving an account of the over- 
 spreading of the earth, from x. 1 to xi. 9. 
 
 6. ‘The generations of Shem,” the 
 line of the promised seed, down to Abram, 
 Nahor, and Haran, the sons of Terah, 
 xl. 10 to 26. 
 
 “The generations of Terah,” the 
 father of Abraham, from whom also in 
 the female line the family was traced 
 through Sarah and Rebekah, from xi. 27 
 to xxv. 11}. 
 
 8. “The generations of Ishmael,” from 
 XXV. 12 to xxv. 18. 
 
 9g. ‘‘The generations of Isaac,” con- 
 taining the history of him and his family 
 from the death of his father to his own 
 death, xxv. 19 to end of xxxv. 
 
 10. * The generations of Esau,” xxxvi. 
 1—8. 
 
 11. ‘The generations of Esau in 
 Mount Seir,” xxxvi. 9 to xxxvil. I. 
 
 12. “The generations of Jacob,” giv- 
 ing the history of Jacob and his sons to 
 his own death and the death of Joseph, 
 XXXvVil. 2 to the end of ch. 1. 
 
 history of the mode in which persons or things 
 came into existence, but rather the history of 
 those who descended from them. Thus ‘‘the 
 Toledoth of Adam” gives the history of Adam 
 and his posterity. In like manner “the Tole- 
 doth of the heavens and the earth” is the history 
 of the material universe and its productions. 
 See Keil on the ‘Pentateuch,’ Vol. 1. pp. 70 
 sqq. (Clark, Edinburgh). 
 
 1 It seems strange that the ‘generations of 
 Abraham” should not be given distinctly from 
 those of his father, and Quarry thinks that the 
 title may have existed, and have fallen out of 
 the MS. just before the last clause of xii. 4. 
 The reason, however, which he himself assigns, 
 seems sufficient to account for the omission, viz. 
 that the history contained in this section is that 
 of Abraham, Lot, Sarah, and of Isaac and 
 Rebekah (all descendants of Terah), down to 
 the death of Abraham, 
 
 23 
 
 Some of these sections relate only to 
 collateral branches and are brief. ‘The 
 larger sections will be found to have sub- 
 divisions within them, which are carefully 
 marked and arranged. As arule, in each 
 of these successive Zoledoth, the narra- 
 tive is carried down to the close of the 
 period embraced, and at the beginning 
 of each succeeding portion a brief repe- 
 tition of so much as is needed of the 
 previous account is given, and with it, 
 very often, a note of time. Thus the 
 Introduction is ushered in with the words 
 “In the Beginning.” ‘Then the second 
 section, referring to what has just been 
 recorded, announces “‘The generations 
 of the heavens and of the earth when they 
 were created, in the day that the Lord 
 God made the earth and the heavens,” 
 ch. it. 4. Then again ch. v. 1, having 
 the same note of time (“In the day,” 
 &c.) refers back to the account of cre- 
 ation, “In the likeness of God made 
 He him, male and female created He 
 them,” &c. The next.-section, vi. 9, 
 “The Toledoth of Noah,” recapitulates 
 the character of Noah, the degeneracy 
 of man, and God’s purpose to destroy 
 all flesh. In xi. 10, the age of Shem 
 and the birth of his son two years 
 after the flood, are named. The like 
 plan is observable in the ‘ Toledoth 
 of Terah,” xi. 27; “the Toledoth of 
 Ishmael,” xxv. 12; “of Isaac,” xxv. 19, 
 “who was forty years old when he took 
 Rebekah to wife;” ‘of Esau,” xxxvi. 1, 
 where his marriages are recorded again: 
 and lastly, in the case of Jacob (xxxvii.2), 
 we find, in the verse immediately pre- 
 ceding (viz. xxxvii. 1), a note telling us 
 
 the position of Jacob at the time, and 
 
 again in vy. 2 and 3 the age of Joseph 
 (“Joseph was seventeen years old”), 
 taking us back to a point of time twelve 
 years before the death of Isaac, which had 
 been before recorded, that so we might 
 see the new starting-point of the history. 
 Space will not allow the tracing of 
 similar recapitulations and notes of time 
 in the smaller sub-sections of the history. 
 It must suffice to observe that they are 
 very characteristic of the whole book, 
 and are had recourse to wherever per- 
 spicuity of narrative seems to require’. 
 
 1 They are traced at length by Quarry (‘ Ge- 
 nesis,’ pp. 326 to 340). 
 
4 
 
 This brief review of the divisions of 
 Genesis shews that it was not a loosely 
 compacted structure, carelessly or clum- 
 sily thrown together by some one, who 
 found a variety of heterogeneous mate- 
 rials and determined to mass them all in 
 one: but that it was drawn up carefully, 
 elaborately, and with distinct unity of 
 purpose; whether from pre-existing do- 
 cuments or not it matters comparatively 
 little to enquire. 
 
 2. Of the names of God as used in the 
 Book of Genesis. 
 
 The names by whichthe Supreme Being 
 is called in the Old Testament, and espe- 
 cially in Genesis, are chiefly two, Elohim 
 and JEHOVAH, the one generally rendered 
 in the versions God, the other Lorp. We 
 meet also with “7 (whieh is but a shorter 
 form of Elohim), with “ox, Most High, 
 (in the’ Pentateuch occurring only in Gen, 
 xiv. 18 in connection with £7; 4£LE“on, 
 God most High, though in the Psalms it is 
 found with Elohim and Jehovah, and also 
 stands alone), and Shaddai, Almighty (in 
 the Pentateuch generally with £7 £7 
 Shaddat; elsewhere standing alone). 
 
 The name //ohim is derived either 
 from the Arabic root Alaha, “to fear, 
 reverence, worship,” or, much more pro- 
 bably, from’ TON (alah) = bis “to be 
 strong, to be mighty’.” It is the simple, 
 generic name of God, ‘The Mighty.” 
 It does not occur in the singular in the 
 earlier books of Scripture, except in the 
 abbreviated form of El. The plural is 
 probably a plural of excellence and ma- 
 jesty. As in Proy.ix.1, “wisdom,” occurs 
 in the plural Chochmoth, to signify wis- 
 dom in the abstract, including in itself 
 all the treasures of wisdom and know- 
 ledge; so //ofim in the plural is applied 
 to God, as coriprehending in Himself 
 the fulness of all power and all the attri- 
 butes which the heathen ascribe to their 
 several divinities (see Smith’s ‘Dict. of 
 Bible,’ Art. JEHovaH). Still the word is a 
 title rather than a name. It is applied 
 to false gods, as well as to the true. The 
 heathen nations round about the Israel- 
 ites would have recognized the existence 
 and the divinity of El and of the Elohim. 
 
 1 It is more probable that the verb to signify 
 ‘*fear and worship” is derived from the name 
 of the Deity, than that the name of the Deity 
 was derived from the verb signifying ‘‘ to fear,” 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 JEHOVAH, on the contrary, is as clear- 
 ly a proper name as Jupiter or Vishnu. 
 Lilohim and Jehovah are therefore as 
 distinguishable as Deus and Jupiter ; the 
 difference being only in this, that, where- 
 as the worshippers of Jupiter admitted 
 ‘“‘sods many and lords many,” a multi- 
 tude of Dz, the worshippers of Jehovah, 
 on the other hand, believe in no Elohim 
 except JEHOVAH. We may see at once, 
 then, that there may be good reasons for 
 expecting the title Elohim to be chiefly 
 employed in some passages, whilst the 
 proper name JEHOVAH would be chiefly 
 employed in others. For instance, in 
 the general account of ereation it is very 
 natural that Elohim, the Mighty One, 
 the God of creation and providence, 
 should be the word in use. So, where 
 foreigners, people of heathen nations, as 
 Hagar, Eliezer of Damascus, the Egyp- 
 tians, &c. are introduced, it is’ most na- 
 tural that the word Elohim should be 
 more frequent than JEHOVAH, unless 
 where some distinct acknowledgment 
 of JEHOVAH is intended. On the con- 
 trary, when the history of the chosen 
 people or their ancestors is specially con- 
 cerned, and the stream of the Theocracy 
 traced down from its fountain head, 
 then the special name of Him, who was 
 not ashamed to be called their God, 
 would probably be of more frequent use. 
 This, if kept clearly in view, will explain 
 many of the so-called Elohistic and Je- 
 hovistic phenomena in Genesis. Ano- 
 ther thing to be noted is this. The 
 Semitic tongues, especially the more 
 ancient and simpler forms of them, deal 
 much in repetition, and where our mo- 
 dern Aryan languages would put a pro- 
 noun, they very frequently repeat the 
 noun. From this general habit of repeti- 
 tion, and especially the habit of repeat- 
 ing the noun rather than using the pro- 
 noun, when in any one chapter or section 
 we find either the word Elohim or the 
 name JEHOVAH, we are very likely to find: 
 the same frequently recurring. In con- 
 sequence of this, the several passages 
 will to an European eye look as if they 
 were strongly marked either by the title 
 Elohim, or by the name JEHOVAH. For 
 instance, it is alleged that in the first 
 account of creation, ch. I, il. I—3, 
 Elohim occurs thirty-five times, and 
 
THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 
 
 that there is here no other name of 
 God: but it has been replied, that, if it 
 occurred once, it was only natural, owing 
 to the uniformity of the whole passage, 
 that it should have occurred again at 
 each account of a separate creation, and 
 also that in modern language a pronoun 
 would have been substituted in many 
 cases for the repeated title or name. 
 Hence the thirty-five are in effect re- 
 ducible to one. ‘The passage is scarcely 
 more really marked as Elohistic by the 
 name Elohim occurring thirty-five times, 
 than if it had occurred but onee; for its 
 having occurred once would inevitably 
 lead to its continued and frequent recur- 
 rence’. 
 
 The most important passage in rela- 
 tion to this question is, of course, Exod. vi. 
 
 1 Quarry, ‘on Genesis,’ pp. 341, 400, 401. 
 The following table of the alternation of the 
 names in the first 11 chapters is given by the 
 learned author, and will shew how different the 
 virtual occurrence of the respective names is 
 from the apparent, superficial occurrence on 
 which so much has been built : - 
 
 ‘ J. 
 
 Elohim 35 times =1 
 Elohim ee 
 Jehovah 
 
 Ch, i. ii. I—3. 
 ili. 1—5. 
 iv. rip 
 
 2—16, 
 
 25. 
 26. 
 
 Vv. 1 
 22—24. 
 
 29. 
 vi. 2—4. 
 
 3. 
 
 5—8. 
 . Elohim 
 
 24. 
 
 x, 9g 
 xi, 5—9 
 
 Jehovah 
 Elohim 
 Jehovah 
 Elohim 
 Elohim 
 Jehovah 
 Elohim 
 Jehovah 
 Jehovah 
 
 . Jehovah 
 
 . Elohim 
 . Elohim 
 
 Jehovah 
 
 . Elohim 
 . Elohim 
 
 . Jehovah 
 . Elohim 
 
 . Elohim 
 . Jehovah 
 
 Elohim 
 Elohim 
 . Jehovah 
 . Jehovah 
 
 Dee SHR YPNW HD SB ewe DNF HK DW DD HOW Oe wD 
 
 5 
 
 15 
 
 ‘“‘¥fence for the purposes of the present en- 
 quiry, and as evidence of any predilection of 
 either name, the case is just as if in these eleven 
 chapters, in the order of succession and at the 
 distances here indicated, the name Elohim had 
 recurred singly 15 times, and the name Jehovah 
 12 times.” 
 
 25 
 
 2, 3, where according to the Authorized 
 Version, ‘God spake unto Moses, and said 
 unto him, Iam JEHovaH; and J appeared 
 unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, 
 by the name of God Almighty, but by 
 my name JEHOVAH was I not known to 
 them.” The inference derived from this 
 passage has been this. ‘The person, who 
 recorded these words of God to Moses, 
 would never have written a history of 
 still earlier times, in which the name 
 JEHOVAH should be introduced not only 
 in the narrative, but in the mouths of 
 the various speakers, from Eve down- 
 wards. Hence, no doubt, in his earlier 
 history the writer of this passage would 
 surely have been.an Elohist. The parts 
 of Genesis then, which are characterized 
 by the use of the title Elohim, may pro- 
 bably be attributed to him: but all the 
 parts in which JEHOVAH predominates 
 were evidently added afterwards, and 
 must be due to some one who was not 
 alive to the incongruity of introducing 
 Jehovistic language into a_ history of 
 events and speeches prior to the revela- 
 tion of the name JEHovaAH. It follows, 
 of course, that the very first who could 
 possibly have written the original Elo- 
 histic narrative was Moses, the ]ehovis- 
 tic portions being necessarily much later 
 than Moses. It is further argued, how- 
 ever, that names compounded with the 
 sacred name of JAH or JEHOVAH do not 
 occur till the time of Samuel, hence 
 it is added that the name could not 
 have been known, nor the sixth chapter 
 of Exodus written, till the time of Sa- 
 
 -muel: and further, it is now alleged that 
 
 the name JEHOVAH is unknown even to 
 the writer of the earlier Psalms, and that 
 therefore probably David learned it late 
 in hfe from its inventor Samuel. 
 
 The romance of modern criticism is as 
 remarkable as its perverse ingenuity : for 
 when once a theory has been suggested, 
 its author and his followers proceed 
 forthwith to construct an elaborate his- 
 tory upon it, as much as if, instead of 
 excogitating a theory, they had discover- 
 ed a library of authentic records. The 
 wider the theory is from all that has 
 hitherto been believed from concurrent 
 testimony and careful enquiry, the more 
 it finds acceptance and is hailed as a 
 discovery. If we look a little closely 
 
 GOO 
 <x PARK Co;> 
 ~ oN 
 Oa ag 
 
26 
 
 into the foundations of the theory, it will 
 appear as baseless as other dreams. 
 
 First, as regards the names compound- 
 ed with JAH, we have at all events Joche- 
 bed, Joshua, Jonah, Jotham, Micah and 
 Jonathan and mount Moriah, besides 
 three named in Chronicles, Azariah (1 
 Chr. ii. 8), Abiah (x Chr. ii. 24), Ahijah 
 (1 Chr. ii. 25), all of which at least ap- 
 pear to have been so compounded, and 
 which it is a gratuitous slander to say 
 were the inventions of later days. More- 
 over, it by no means follows, that one 
 age should have had the fashion of a 
 special form for the composition of 
 names, because we find that fashion 
 prevailing some centuries later. Names 
 compounded with azy name of God are 
 rare in the early ages, but became com- 
 mon in the later. Secondly, as regards 
 the Psalms, there is no foundation what- 
 ever for saying that the earlier Psalms 
 are Elohistic and the later only Jeho- 
 vistic. Many of the manifestly and con- 
 fessedly later Psalms (as the 78th, 82nd, 
 114th, &c.) are eminently Elohistic, whilst 
 many of the earliest (as the 24th, 27th, 
 34th, &c.) are as eminently Jehovistic’. 
 
 But again, the form and derivation of 
 the name JEHOVAH points to a pre-Mosaic 
 origin. Some of the German writers in- 
 deed have tried to trace the name to an 
 attempt at expressing in Hebrew letters 
 the name of the Phcenician god, Jao. 
 Time will not allow of a lengthened con- 
 sideration of this theory here. Suffice it 
 to say that its chief support is an oracu- 
 lar response of the Clarian Apollo quoted 
 by Macrobius (‘Sat.’ 1c. 18) about 400 
 A.D.; which has been clearly proved by 
 Jablonsky to have originated in a Juda- 
 izing gnostic”, 
 
 It is now generally admitted by com- 
 petent Semitic scholars, that the word 
 signifies ‘the existent” or something 
 nearly akin to this. The true pronuncia- 
 tion, of course, is lost; but there can be 
 no reasonable doubt, that, as the name 
 of God declared to Moses in Ex. iii. 14, 
 viz. nN, I AM, is the first person pre- 
 sent of the substantive verb, so the name 
 
 1 The Editor has shewn this more at length 
 in his tract, called ‘The Pentateuch and the 
 Elohistic Psalms’ (Longman). 
 
 2 See the whole question discussed in Smith’s 
 ‘Dict. of Rible,’ 1, p. 953, and Quarry, ‘Genesis,’ 
 Pp. 300 sqq. 
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 TO 
 
 ‘JEHOVAH is part of the same, but pro- 
 
 bably the third person present, or, as 
 others think, the same tense of a causative 
 (Hiphil) form’. But if so, there can be 
 no question, as even Ewald fully admits, 
 that the name must have been pre- 
 Mosaic. In Hebrew the verb is always 
 hayah, though in Syriac and Chaldee it 
 is always Aavah. A name therefore de- 
 rived from /avah and existing in ancient 
 Hebrew, must have come down from a 
 time prior to the separation of the He- 
 brews from their kindred Arameeans, 2.¢. 
 not later than the time of Abraham. In 
 fact the name min’ (IHVH) could not 
 have been found among the Hebrews, at 
 any period of history from the descent 
 into Egypt to the captivity of Babylon: 
 and as it undoubtedly exists in Hebrew 
 writings prior to the captivity, so it must 
 have originated before the time of Joseph. 
 
 We must conclude, then, that the name 
 JEHOVAH was not unknown to the patri- 
 archs, nor do the words of Exodus neces- 
 sarily mean that it was. These words 
 literally are, “I am JEHOvAH: and I ap- 
 peared (or was manifested) to Abraham 
 and to Isaac and to Jacob by El-Shad- 
 dai, but My name JEHOVAH was I not 
 known to them:” that is to say, “I 
 manifested myself to the patriarchs in 
 the character of El-Shaddai, the Omni- 
 potent God, able to fulfil that which I 
 had promised; but as to my name (ze. 
 my character and attributes of) JEHOVAH 
 I was not made manifest to them’.” (So 
 LXX. Vulg. ov« édyjAwoa, non indicavi). 
 The words strictly and naturally imply 
 this. The ancient versions seem to con- 
 firm this interpretation. It is no new 
 one framed to meet modern objections, 
 but was propounded by Aben Ezra 
 and Rashi among the Jews, and by 
 many of the most illustrious Christian 
 commentators of past times. 
 
 The theory then of the late invention 
 of this sacred name has really no founda- 
 tion. That its use was very much more 
 
 1 Thus it corresponds in form with such names 
 as Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, which are all the third 
 persons singular present of verbs. 
 
 2 “In El-Shaddai” is interpreted to mean 
 ‘fas El-Shaddai,” ‘in the character of El- 
 Shaddai,” (Gesen, Lex. s.v. 2 div. C.). ‘*The 
 name of Jehovah,” as meaning the character of 
 Jehovah, is very common. Cf, Ps. v. II, Vili. I, 
 1x, 10, Is. xxvi. 8, xxx. 
 
THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 
 
 prevalent after the revelation to Moses 
 in Exodus than it had been before, there 
 can be no reasonable doubt. God made 
 His special covenant with Abram, be- 
 ginning with the emphatic words, “I 
 am El-Shaddai,” Gen. xvii. 1. So again 
 on a like occasion He spake to Jacob, 
 Gen. xxxv. 11. Hence both Isaac and 
 Jacob seemed to lay especial stress upon 
 that name in times of trouble and anxiety 
 (see Gen. xxvili. 3, xlili. 14), as recalling 
 to them the faithfulness and the power 
 of their covenant God. But to Moses 
 the words are frequently spoken, “I am 
 JEHOVAH,” and the covenant, which had 
 been assured to the patriarchs by God as 
 El-Shaddai, the Mighty God, is now 
 assured to the people of Israel, by the 
 same God, as JEHOVAH, the self-existent, 
 the cause of all being, governing the 
 past, the present, and the future. Let 
 us then suppose, that Moses had access 
 to, or knowledge of, oral or written 
 traditions concerning the Creation, which 
 must from the nature of the case have 
 been originally matter of revelation, the 
 Flood, the history of Abraham, Isaac and 
 Jacob; it is most likely that he would 
 have made these the ground-work of hig 
 history. If the name, JEHOVAH, was known 
 to the patriarchs, but had, as seems most 
 likely from the first chapters of Exodus, 
 been latterly but little used, perhaps 
 wholly disused, among the Israelites in 
 Egypt; then it is pretty certain that 
 these traditions or documents would 
 have had El, Elohim, or Elion, for the 
 name of God, perhaps even to the exclu- 
 sion of the name JeEHovAH. In working 
 up these materials into a continuous his- 
 tory, some of the documents would be 
 preserved entire, others might be so ar- 
 ranged and so worded as to fit them to 
 be connecting links one with the other, 
 while we should probably find many por- 
 tions of the history in the hand of the au- 
 thor or compiler himself. If Moses was 
 that author, though he would often use 
 the name Elohim, we might naturally 
 expect to find that he had a fondness 
 for that sacred name by which the Most 
 High had declared Himself as the spe- 
 cial Protector of His people ; and hence 
 we might look for that name in passages 
 where another writer perhaps would not 
 have introduced it. If, as we infer from 
 
 | 
 
 Josh. xxiv. 14, the Israelites in Egypt 
 had learned to serve strange gods, there 
 would be the more reason why Moses 
 should set before them the one true 
 God, as their own God, and exhibit Him 
 under His name, JEHOVAH, thereby the 
 more clearly to mark Him off from the 
 false Elohim of Egypt, and the false Elo- 
 him of Canaan. 
 
 Now the facts of Genesis remarkably 
 coincide with all this probability. Some 
 portions of the narrative do indeed pre- 
 sent what is called an Elohistic aspect ; 
 and especially those portions, which, of 
 their very nature, are most likely to 
 have existed in the traditions current 
 from old time among the Israelites, viz. 
 the general account of the Creation, the 
 Flood, the covenant of circumcision made 
 with Abraham, and the genealogical 
 tables. ‘These then Moses appears to 
 have adopted, much as he found them, 
 nur perpetuating, word for word; in 
 
 is writings what before had been float- 
 ing in unwritten record. Yet these por- 
 tions of the narrative are not loosely 
 thrown in, but rather carefully and or- 
 ganically incorporated and imbedded in 
 the whole. 
 
 For instance, in the history of creation, 
 we have first, in Gen. 1. il. 1—3, that 
 which was very probably the ancient pri- 
 meval record of the formation of the 
 world, It may even have been commu- 
 nicated to the first man in his innocence. 
 At all events, it very probably was the 
 great Semitic tradition, handed down 
 from Noah to Shem, from Shem to Abra- 
 ham, and from Abraham through Isaac, 
 Jacob and Joseph, to the Israelites who 
 dwelt in Egypt. Without interfering with 
 the integrity of this, the sacred author 
 proceeds in the same chapter to add a 
 supplementary history, briefly recapitu- 
 lating the history of creation, with some 
 little addition (in vv. 4—7), and then 
 proceeding to the history of Paradise, 
 the Fall, the expulsion, and the first bit- 
 ter fruits of disobedience. In the first 
 part of this second or supplementary 
 history we meet with a signal phenome- 
 non, viz. that, from ch. il. 4 to the end 
 of chapter iii. the two names (or rather 
 the generic and the personal names) of 
 God, JEHOvAH and Elohim, are used 
 continually together. There is no other 
 
28 
 
 instance in Scripture of this continued 
 and repeated use of the united names. 
 It is evident, that the author, who adopt- 
 ed the first ancient record and stamped 
 it with authority, and who desired to 
 bring his people to a worship of the great 
 self-existent JEHOVAH, used this method 
 of transition from the ancient Elohistic 
 document to his own more immediate 
 narrative, in order that he might more 
 forcibly impress upon his readers, that 
 the Elohim who created all things was 
 also the JEHOVAH, who had revealed 
 Himself to Moses, and who was now 
 to be spoken of as the Protector and 
 King of the great Theocratic race, whose 
 history was to be traced down even 
 from the very creation of Adam. ‘The 
 consistency and close connection of the 
 two parts is admitted by some, who are 
 far from admitting the Divine original 
 or high inspiration of the Pentateuch. 
 ‘The second account,” says Kalisch (2 
 foc.) “is no abrupt fragment; it is not 
 unconnected with the first; it is not su- 
 perfluous repetition; it has been com- 
 posed with clear consciousness after, and 
 with reference to, the first. ‘The author 
 of the Pentateuch added to an ancient 
 document on creation the history of 
 man’s disobedience and its consequence. 
 ..- Lhe first account was composed in- 
 dependently of the second; but the 
 second is a distinct and deliberate con- 
 tinuation of the first:...It does not mere- 
 ly recapitulate, but it introduces new 
 facts and a new train of thought.” The 
 consistency of the two narratives, and 
 a consideration of the alleged incon- 
 sistencies, will be seen in the commen- 
 tary (on ch. ii. especially). One singular 
 point of resemblance it may be well to 
 point out here. In ch. i. 26, in the so 
 called Elohistic document, we have the 
 remarkable words, ‘‘ Let us make man,” 
 the plural pronoun used by the Almighty 
 Himself, and the appearance of deli- 
 beration. In ch. iii. 22 (in the so called 
 Jehovistic portion) we have again, “ Be- 
 hold the man is become as one of us:” 
 again the very observable plural, and 
 again perhaps even more markedly 
 anthropomorphic language, as though 
 the Most High were taking counsel, 
 before executing His judgments. This 
 identity of thought and speech is very 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 observable, The like occurs again in 
 ch. xi. 6; where neither Elohim, nor JE- 
 HOVAH-Elohim, but JEHOVAH alone is 
 the name of God made use of’. There 
 is not space to go through the book of 
 Genesis and shew how similar principles 
 prevail throughout. If the basis of the 
 history of the Flood were an ancient Elo- 
 histic document, Moses appears to have 
 interwoven it with a further narrative of 
 his own. The one portion may be mark- 
 ed by the prevalence of one name, the 
 other by that of another name of God; 
 but the consistency of the one with the 
 other is complete throughout (see notes 
 on the history, infra). ‘The same will 
 appear in other portions of Genesis, 
 though the creation and the flood most 
 clearly exhibit both the phenomena re- 
 lied on by the theorists and the facts 
 leading to a refutation of their theory. 
 
 It must not, however, be thought that 
 the variety in the employment of the 
 sacred names could have resulted only 
 from the variety of the materials used 
 by Moses and the additional matter 
 introduced by hiniself. Careful obser- 
 vation will shew, that; whilst often it 
 was a matter of indifference whether 
 the one or the other name was intro- 
 duced, yet there was no mere eareless- 
 ness in the introduction. On the con- 
 trary, in most passages it is impossible 
 to doubt that the choice of the name 
 adopted is the happiest possible. 
 
 Thus in the first history of creation 
 we have Elohim, the mighty one, God 
 of Creation and Providence, then in 
 order to mark the transition of subject 
 and yet the unity of the Being spoken 
 of, we have for two chapters JEHOVAH 
 Elohim; but when we come to the ivth 
 chapter and to Eve’s exclamation, when 
 she hoped that her firstborn should be 
 the aricestor of the promised seed, the 
 words ascribed to her connect her hope 
 with JEHOVAH, Him whom the Israelites 
 learned to look on as their covenant 
 God, who was to make good all the 
 promises to the fathers. Again, in ch. 
 v. the genealogy from Adam to Noah 
 has no Divine name except Elohim, till 
 we come, in v. 29, to the birth of Noah, 
 and his father’s pious anticipation that 
 he should be a comfort to his race, in 
 
 - 1 See Quarry, p. 348. 
 
THE BOOK OF GENESIS, 
 
 teference to the earth, which had been 
 cursed. The use of the name JEHOVAH 
 in this verse points us at once to the 
 fact that Noah became the second head 
 of the Theocratic race, the new deposi- 
 tary of the promises of God. If we 
 pass on to ch. xiv. we are introduced 
 to Melchizedek, priest and king of a 
 Canaanitish people. He is a worship- 
 per of Z-Ziion, God most High, this 
 being evidently the name by which the 
 Almighty was known to him and to his 
 countrymen. Once, however, the name 
 JEHOVAH occurs in the chapter, but it 
 is in the mouth of Abraham, and Abra- 
 ham evidently uses it that he may shew 
 that he acknowledges the El-Elion wor- 
 shipped by Melchizedek to be one and 
 the same with the JEHovay, who was the 
 God of Hebrews. “I have lift up my 
 hand to JEHOVAH, El-Elion, possessor 
 of heaven and earth,” xiv. 22. A similar 
 propriety of usage prevails throughout 
 Genesis, and will frequently be referred 
 to in the notes. 
 
 Again, verbal peculiarities are said to 
 distinguish the so called Jehovistic from 
 the so called Elohistic portions of the 
 Pentateuch, so that, besides the variety 
 in the use of the names of God, it is 
 possible for a keen eye to disentangle 
 the different documents the one from the 
 other by noting the phraseology peculiar 
 to each. It will be plain that, if even 
 this were proved and patent, it would 
 still not interfere with the Mosaic origin 
 of Genesis, so long as we admit. that 
 Moses may have used the so called 
 Elohistic MSS. or traditions. The 
 Elohistic phraseology would then be 
 characteristic of the more ancient docu- 
 ments, the Jehovistic would belong to 
 Moses himself. It is, however, very 
 clear, that the peculiarities are greatly 
 magnified, if they exist at all. Some- 
 times indeed the theorists discover that 
 a passage must belong to the Elohist 
 for instance, because it contains Elohistic 
 expressions; but then, though the name 
 JEHOVAH occurs in it, that name must 
 be a later insertion because it does not 
 correspond with the general wording of 
 the chapter. Thus the name JEHovAH 
 in ch. xvii. 1 is argued to be evidently 
 out of place, because Elohim occurs 
 everywhere else (ten times) in the chap- 
 
 29 
 
 ter. Surely this is constructing a theory 
 in despite, not in consequence, of the 
 facts on which it ought to stand’. 
 
 Again anthropomorphisms are said 
 to characterise the Jehovist passages, 
 This is by no means unlikely, consider- 
 ing that JEHOVAH is the personal name 
 of God, and that by which He was 
 pleased to reveal Himself familiarly to 
 His people; yet they are far from ex- 
 clusively belonging to the Jehovistic 
 portions. Lastly, all the indications of 
 a more advanced civilization, such as 
 the use of gold, jewels, earrings, musical 
 instruments, camels, servants, &c. are 
 assigned to the Jehovist, and are thought 
 to mark a period later than that of 
 Moses. But surely the Israelites, who 
 had dwelt for centuries in the fairest 
 province in Egypt, and Moses who had 
 been bred up in the court of a powerful 
 and luxurious Pharaoh, must have 
 been familiar with a civilization consider- 
 ably in advance of anything that we 
 read of in Genesis. Indeed the graphic 
 account which Genesis gives of the 
 simple habits of Abraham and the other 
 patriarchs is one proof of its antiquity 
 and its truth, It is very doubtful 
 whether an author even in the time of 
 Samuel, more than doubtful whether one 
 in the reign of Solomon, of Josiah, or 
 one of those who returned with Ezra 
 from captivity, could have written the 
 history of the forefathers of his race 
 with all the truthfulness, all the sim- 
 plicity, and all the accuracy of detail 
 to be found in the Book which is called 
 the First Book of Moses. Moses could 
 have written it, for he had every conceiv- 
 able qualification for writing it. ‘The 
 writer of after times, who could have pro- 
 duced that book, must have been himself 
 a wonder, unsurpassed by any of those 
 wonders which he is supposed to have 
 devised and recorded. 
 
 The supposed inconsistency of the 
 statements in Genesis with the recent 
 
 1 The distinction between the Elohistic and 
 Jehovistic words and phrases is carefully and 
 elaborately investigated by Mr Quarry (‘Genesis,’ 
 pp. 578 sqq.). The conclusion at which he 
 arrives is the very reverse of the conclusion 
 arrived at by the believers in the fragment 
 theory. 
 
30 
 
 discoveries of science will be found 
 treated of in the notes to the earlier 
 chapters. It may be well here only to 
 say, that in the present state of our 
 knowledge, both critical and scientific, 
 a patient suspension of judgment on 
 many points seems our wisest attitude. 
 It is plain that a miraculous revelation 
 of scientific truths was never designed 
 by God for man. The account of 
 creation is given in popular language; 
 yet it is believed that it will be found 
 not inconsistent with, though not an- 
 ticipatory of, modern discovery. And 
 after all, modern discovery is yet in a 
 most imperfect condition, the testimony 
 : of the rocks and of the stars but im- 
 perfectly read, whilst there is room for 
 no small diversity of sentiment on the 
 meaning of many of the expressions 
 in Genesis. At present the greatest in- 
 consistency alleged as between Genesis 
 and science is to be found in the ques- 
 tion of the antiquity of man. Whilst 
 there is at least good reason for with- 
 holding confident assent from the con- 
 clusions of some eminent geologists as 
 to the evidence of the drift; it is quite 
 possible to believe that Genesis gives 
 us no certain data for pronouncing on 
 the time of man’s existence on the earth. 
 The only arguments are to be drawn 
 from the genealogies. As those given by 
 the Evangelists are confessedly incom- 
 plete, there cannot be sufficient reason 
 for maintaining that those in Genesis 
 must have been complete. It is true 
 that we have only conjecture to lead 
 us here: but if the genealogies, before 
 and after the Flood, present us only 
 with the names of leading and “‘repre- 
 sentative” men; we can then allow no 
 small latitude to those who would extend 
 the duration of man upon the earth to 
 more than the commonly received six 
 thousand years. The appearance of 
 completeness in the genealogies is an 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 
 
 undoubted difficulty ; yet perhaps not 
 insuperable, when we consider all that 
 may have happened (no where more 
 probably than here) in the transmis- 
 sion of the text from Moses to Ezra 
 and from Ezra to the destruction of Je- 
 rusalem. 
 
 Let us suppose that it had pleased 
 God to reveal to Moses the fact that 
 the earth revolves round the sun, a 
 fact familiar now to children, but un- 
 known to astronomers for more than 
 three thousand years after the Exodus. 
 The effect of such a revelation would 
 probably have been to place the believer 
 and the astronomer in a state of an- 
 tagonism. The ancient believer would 
 have believed the truth; yet the ob- 
 server of the heavens would have tri- 
 umphantly convicted him of ignorance 
 and error. We can see plainly that the 
 wise course for both would have been 
 to suspend their judgments, believing 
 the Bible and yet following out the 
 teaching of nature. A Galileo would 
 then have been, not feared as a here- 
 tic, but hailed as a harmonist. There 
 appears now to some an _ inconsis- 
 tency between the words of Moses and 
 the records of creation. Both may be 
 misinterpreted. Further research into 
 science, language, literature and exegesis, 
 may shew that there is substantial agree- 
 ment, where there now appears partial 
 inconsistency. It would evidently have 
 served no good purpose, had a revela- 
 tion been vouchsafed of the Copernican 
 system, or of modern geological science. 
 Yet there may be in Scripture truth popu- 
 larly expressed concerning the origin of 
 all things, truth not apparent to us, be- 
 cause we have not yet acquired the 
 knowledge to see and appreciate it. Cer- 
 tainly as yet nothing has been proved 
 which can disprove the records of 
 Genesis, if both the proof and the re- 
 cords be interpreted largely and fairly. 
 
frie FikS TT BOOK, OF MOSES, 
 
 CALLED 
 
 GN hese LS, 
 
 CHarrerR T. 
 
 1 The creation of heaven and earth, 3 of the 
 light, 6 of the firmament, 9 of the earth sepa- 
 vated from the waters, 11 and made fruitful, 
 14 of the sun, moon, and stars, 20 of fish and 
 Sowl, 24 of beasts and cattle, 26 of man in 
 the image of God. 29 Also the appointment 
 
 a 33¢ of food. “i 4 
 & 136. 5. 
 
 Actsrzzs. | N “the beginning God created 
 ae the heaven and the earth. 
 
 2 And the earth was without form, 
 and void; and darkness was upon the 
 face of thedeep. And the Spirit of God 
 moved upon the face of the waters. 
 
 And God said, *Let there be ?2or-4.6. 
 
 light: and there was light. { Heb. Jee 
 
 4. And God saw the light, that zt twee we 
 was good: and God divided ‘the Between 
 light from the darkness. i a 
 
 s 7€SS. 
 
 CuaAp. 1.1. In the beginning] Not ‘first 
 in order,” but ‘‘in the beginning of all things.” 
 ‘The same expression is used in Joh. i. 1, of 
 the existence of the ‘‘Word of God,” ‘In 
 the beginning was the Word.” The one 
 passage illustrates the other, though it is partly 
 by the contrast of thoughts. The Word was, 
 when the world was created. 
 
 God created] In the first two chapters 
 of Genesis we meet with four different verbs 
 to express the creative work of God, viz. 
 1, to create; 2, to make; 3, to form; 4, to 
 build. The first is used of the creation of 
 the universe (v. 1); of the creation of the 
 great sea-monsters, whose vastness appears 
 to have excited special wonder (v. 21); and 
 of the creation of man, the head of animated 
 nature, in the image of God (v. 27). Every- 
 where else we read of God’s making, as from 
 an already created substance, the firmament, 
 the sun, the stars, the brute creation (vv. 7, 
 16, 25, &c.); or of His forming the beasts 
 of the field out of the ground (ch. ii. 19); or 
 lastly, of His duilding up (ii. 22, margin) 
 into a woman the rib which He had taken 
 from man. In Isai. xliii. 7, three of these 
 verbs occur together. ‘I have created him 
 for my glory, I have formed him, yea, I have 
 made him.” Perhaps no other ancient lan- 
 guage, however refined or philosophical, could 
 have so clearly distinguished the different acts 
 of the Maker of all things, and that because all 
 heathen philosophy esteemed matter to have 
 been eternal and uncreated. It cannot justly 
 be objected that the verb create, in its first sig- 
 nification, may have been sensuous, meaning 
 probably to sew stone or to fell timber. 
 Almost all abstract or spiritual thoughts are 
 
 ’ expressed by words which were originally 
 concrete or sensuous; and in nearly all the 
 
 passages of Scripture in which the verb in 
 question occurs, the idea of a true creation 
 is that which is most naturally implied. Even 
 where the translators have rendered it other- 
 wise, the sense is still clearly the same, e.g. in 
 Numb. xvi. 30, “If the LoRD make a new 
 thing (lit. create a creation), and the earth 
 open her mouth;” or again, Ps. Ixxxix. 47, 
 ‘¢Wherefore hast Thou made (Heb. created) 
 all things for nought?” ‘The word is evi- 
 dently the common word for a true and ori- 
 ginal creation, and there is no other word in 
 Hebrew which can express that thought. 
 
 the heaven and the earth| ‘The universe 
 popularly described according to its appear- 
 ance as earth and sky. In similar language, 
 as Grotius notes, the new creation, to be 
 hereafter looked for, is described 2 Pet. 
 ili. 13, as ‘‘new heavens and a new earth.” 
 The Hebrew word for heaven is always 
 plural, whether as expressive of greatness, or 
 perhaps of multitude, like the old English 
 plural, welkin. 
 
 2. And the earth was without form, and 
 void |Desolate and void. Thesetwowords 
 express devastation and desolation. ‘They 
 are used of the desert, Job xii. 243 xxvi. 
 7; of the devastated city, Isa. xxiv. 10; of 
 ‘‘the line of wasting, and the plummet of 
 destruction,” Isa. xxxiv. 11. In Jer. iv. 23 
 they describe the utter wasting of a con- 
 demned and desolated land. Whether in the 
 present verse they indicate entire absence of 
 life and order, or merely that the world was 
 not then, as now, teeming with life; whether 
 they express primeval emptiness, or rather 
 desolation and disorder succeeding to a former 
 state of life and harmony, cannot immediately 
 be determined. The purpose of the sacred 
 writer is to give a history of man, his fall, 
 
GENESIS ol 
 
 5 And God called the light Day, 
 and the darkness he called Night. 
 
 [v. 5. 
 
 tAnd the evening and the morning t Heb. 
 And the 
 were the first day. 
 
 evening 
 was, and the morning was, &c. 
 ? ? 
 
 his promised recovery, then specially of the 
 
 chosen seed, and of the rise of the ‘Theocracy. 
 He therefore contents himself with declaring 
 in One verse generally the creation of all 
 things, and then in the next verse passes to 
 the earth, man’s place of abode, and to its pre- 
 paration for the habitation of man. Count- 
 less ages may have elapsed between what is 
 recorded in v. 1, and what is stated in v. 2. 
 Some indeed have insisted on the close con- 
 nection of v. 2 with v. 1, because they are 
 united by the word And: but this particle, 
 though necessarily implying transition, does 
 by no means necessarily imply close connec- 
 tion. ‘The Book of Leviticus begins with 
 ‘‘And the Lord called unto Moses.” ‘The 
 Book of Exodus begins with the same word 
 And, though centuries intervene between its 
 history and that of the Book of Genesis; and 
 so our translators have very reasonably ren- 
 dered the Hebrew particle in that passage not 
 And, but Now. ‘The meaning of the verse 
 before us evidently is, ‘‘In the beginning God 
 created the universe ;” but, at the time now 
 to be spoken of, the earth, which is our chief 
 concern, was shapeless and waste. ‘The verb 
 ‘“was” as used in this yerse implies, not 
 succession, but condition at the time in 
 question. 
 
 darkness was upon the face of the deep] 
 No light penetrated to the desolate and dis- 
 ordered ruin. The deep may mean either 
 the confused mass itself, or, as more fre- 
 quently, the abyss of waters and the clouds 
 and mists with which the earth was sur- 
 rounded. 
 
 the Spirit of God moved upon the face of 
 the waters] ‘The ‘Targum of Onkelos and 
 many Jewish commentators render ‘‘a mighty 
 wind was moving,” &c., which is favoured, 
 though not proved, by the absence of the ar- 
 ticle. The common rendering is the more 
 natural, especially if the word ‘‘moved” sig- 
 nifies, as some think, not merely fluttering or 
 hovering, as of a bird over its nest, but also 
 brooding, as of a bird sitting on itseggs. (See 
 Deut. xxxil. 11, where it is used of the eagle 
 fluttering over her young.) ‘The Spirit of 
 God appears to be represented as the great 
 quickening principle, hovering or brooding 
 over the earth and the ocean, and breathing 
 forth upon them light and life. 
 
 8. God said| In the cognate languages 
 the word here rendered said has the force of 
 commanded. 
 
 Let there be light: and there was light] 
 Was light created before the creation of the 
 sun and other luminous bodies? ‘That this 
 is possible has been shewn by Dr M°Caul, 
 
 ‘Aids to Faith,’ p. 210, &c.; but very pro- 
 bably the creation of the sun is related in v. 1, 
 where under the word heaven (or heavens) 
 may be comprehended the whole visible uni- 
 verse of sun, moon, and stars. Now, the 
 history is going on to the adaptation of the 
 earth for man’s abode. In v. 2 a thick dark- 
 ness had enveloped it. In this 3rd verse the 
 darkness is dispelled by the word of God, 
 the light is separated from the darkness, and 
 the regular succession of day and night is esta- 
 blished. Still probably there remains a cloud- 
 ed atmosphere, or other obstacle to the full 
 vision of sun and sky. It is not till the fourth 
 day that these impediments are removed and 
 the sun appears to the earth as the great 
 luminary of the day, the moon and the stars 
 as reigning in the night. Light may, perhaps, 
 have been created before the sun. Yet the 
 statement, that on the first day, not only was 
 there light, but the succession of day and 
 night, seems to prove that the creation of the 
 sun was ‘‘in the beginning,” though its visible 
 manifestation in the firmament was not till the 
 fourth day. 
 
 4. God saw the light, that it was good] 
 The earlier the records, the more we find 
 in them of anthropopathic language, as the 
 better fitted to simple understandings. ‘The 
 design of words like these is to express em- 
 phatically, that all the works, as they came 
 direct from the hand of God, were good, and 
 that the evil did not result from any defect in 
 the workmanship, but from the will of the 
 creature not according with the will of the 
 Creator. 
 
 divided the light from the darkness] In 
 the chaotic condition described in v. 2, all 
 things were confused and commixed; but, 
 when God called the light out of darkness, 
 He set bounds to both of them, and caused a 
 succession of day and night, calling the light 
 day and the darkness night. 
 
 5. And the evening and the morning were 
 the first day] Literally, “‘And it was (or 
 became) evening, and it was (or became) 
 morning, day one.” 
 
 Some think the evening is put before the 
 morning, because the Jews reckoned their 
 days from evening to evening. Others think, 
 that, as the darkness was first and the light 
 called out of darkness, so the evening (in 
 Heb. ered, the time when all things are mixed 
 and confounded) is placed before the morning ; 
 and thus the whole period of chaotic darkness 
 may have been the first night, and the first 
 day that period of light which immediately 
 succeeded the darkness. 
 
 See Note A at end of the Chapter. 
 
v. 6—14.| 
 
 6 4 And God said, “Let there be 
 a tfirmament in the midst of the 
 - waters, and let it divide the waters 
 from the waters. 
 
 And God made the firmament, 
 and divided the waters which were 
 under the firmament from the waters 
 which were above the firmament : 
 and it was so. 
 
 8 And God called the ?firma- 
 ment Heaven. And the evening and 
 the morning were the second day. 
 
 ‘€ And God said, “Let the 
 waters under the heaven be gathered 
 together unto one place, and let the 
 dry Jand appear: and it was so. 
 
 10 And God called the dry land 
 
 GENESIS. I. 33 
 
 Earth; and the gathering together of 
 the waters called he Seas: and God 
 saw that zt was good. 
 
 11 And God said, Let the earth 
 bring forth tgrass, the herb yielding + Heb. 
 seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit 2°" 
 after his kind, whose seed 7s in itself, 
 upon the earth: and it was so. 
 
 12 And the earth brought forth 
 grass, and herb yielding seed after his 
 kind, and the tree yielding fruit, 
 whose seed was in itself, after his 
 kind: and God saw that z¢ was good. 
 
 13 And the evening and the morn- 
 ing were the third day. ¥ 
 
 14 @ And God said, Let there 19. 
 be “lights in the firmament of the ;., 
 
 6. Let there be a firmament| The earth is 
 spoken of as covered with waters, partly, that 
 is, the waters of the sea, partly the heavy 
 clouds and vapours, which hung round it in 
 its state of desolation and darkness. ‘The 
 dispersion of some of these vapours lets in the 
 light. ‘Then, in the present verse, the clouds 
 and mists are described as raised up above 
 the firmament, the firmament itself dividing 
 between the waters of the ocean and the 
 clouds of heaven. It is plain from this that 
 the word rendered firmament embraces the 
 atmosphere immediately surrounding the sur- 
 face of the earth, which bears up the clouds 
 floating in it, in or on the face of which also 
 the birds are described as flying (see v. 20). 
 In v. 14 the word is extended further 
 to embrace the whole region of the sky in 
 which sun and moon and stars appear. In 
 this respect, as Le Clerc notices, it cor- 
 responds with the classical word celum, 
 which meant at times the air just round us, at 
 other times the place of the stars and planets; 
 and so likewise of our own English word 
 heaven, we may say the birds of heaven, the 
 clouds of heaven, or the stars of heaven. ‘The 
 original sense of the word has been much de- 
 bated, but. is of little consequence; for the 
 sacred writer would use the common language 
 of his people, and not go out of his way to 
 devise one which would be philosophically 
 accurate. ‘The verb, from which the sub- 
 stantive is derived, signifies (1) to beat or 
 stamp upon, Ezek. vi. 11, xxv. 6; (2) to 
 spread abroad by stamping, 2 S. xxil. 43; 
 (3) to beat out metal into thin plates, or gold 
 into gold leaf, Ex. xxxix. 3, Num. xvi. 38, 
 Isai. xl. 19; (4) to spread forth, extend, 
 stretch out, Job xxxvil. 18, Ps. cxxxvi. 6, 
 Is. xlii. 5, xliv. 24. ‘The most probable mean- 
 ing of the substantive therefore is the expanse 
 
 Vou. [. 
 
 or the expansion. ‘The LXX. rendered it fr- 
 mament (see here needs ‘on Genesis,’ p. 79) 5 
 and hence it has been argued that Moses 
 taught the sky to be a hard, metallic vault, — 
 in which the sun and stars were fixed; but 
 the most learned modern commentators, in- 
 cluding Gesenius, Kalisch, &c., believe the 
 true etymology of the word to shew that 
 expanse, not firmament, is the right translation. 
 The teaching however of the present passage 
 does not depend on the etymology of the word. 
 If a writer in the present day uses the English 
 word heaven, it does not follow, that he sup- 
 poses the sky to be a vault heaved up from 
 the earth. Neither would it follow that the 
 inspired writer had taught, that the portion of 
 atmosphere, intervening between the sea and 
 the clouds, was a solid mass, even if the word 
 used for it had etymologically signified solidity. 
 
 11. Let the earth bring forth grass] We 
 have here the first calling forth of life upon 
 the earth, vegetable life first, soon to be suc- 
 ceeded by animal life. ‘The earth was made 
 fruitful, and three kinds of vegetation were 
 assigned to it; the tender grass, the com- 
 mon covering of the soil, fit chiefly for the 
 use of the lower animals; herb bearing seed, 
 which should be adapted to the service of 
 man; and trees, with their conspicuous fruits; 
 all three so ordained, that their seed should 
 be in themselves, that they should contain, 
 not a principle of life only, but a power also 
 of fecundity, whereby the race should be per- 
 petuated from generation to generation. 
 
 14. Let there be lights] Lit. luminaries, 
 light-bearers, spoken of lamps and candle- 
 sticks, Ex. xxv. 6, Num. iv. 9, 16. The 
 narrative only tells what sun, moon, and stars 
 are in relation to the earth. When the clouds 
 and mists are dispelled from its surface, the 
 
 Cc 
 
 Deut 4. 
 
 Psal. 136. 
 
34 
 
 t Heb. de- heaven to divide 
 tween the 
 
 day and night ; 
 
 between 
 the night. 
 
 tHeb. for 
 
 the rule of 
 the day, 
 Ce 
 
 &Jer.31.35. 
 
 h 4 Esdr. 
 i475 
 
 G TENTS Shoe ds 
 
 tthe day from the 
 and let them be for signs, 
 and for seasons, and for days, and 
 years: 
 
 15 And let them be for lights in 
 the firmament of the heaven to give 
 light upon the earth: and it was so. 
 
 16 And God made two great 
 lights; the greater light to rule the 
 * day, and the lesser light to rule the 
 night: he made the stars also. 
 
 17 And God set them in the 
 firmament of the heaven to give light 
 upon the earth, 
 
 18 And ts frule over the day 
 and over the night, and to divide the 
 light from the darkness: and God 
 saw that zt was good. 
 
 1g And the evening and the morn- 
 ing were the fourth day. 
 
 20 And God said, * Let the waters 
 
 seas confined within their boundaries, and 
 the first vegetation springs up; then the 
 sky is cleared up, the sun, moon, and stars 
 appear and assume their natural functions, 
 marking days and nights, seasons and years; 
 and God makes or appoints them, the sun to 
 rule the day, and the moon to rule the night. 
 
 16. he made the stars also] ‘The purpose 
 of the sacred narrative being to describe the 
 adaptation of the earth to the use of man, no 
 account is taken of the nature of the stars, 
 as suns or planets, but merely as signs in the 
 heavens. ‘The words in the text may be a 
 kind of parenthesis, not assigning the special 
 time of the creation of the stars. Moreover, 
 the word used is ‘‘made,” not ‘‘created,”’ see 
 on v. 1. When the Sun and Moon became 
 great lights to rule the day and to rule the 
 night, then also the stars shone forth; the 
 heavens were lit up by the sun in the ‘day- 
 time, by the moon and stars in the night- 
 season, all of them declaring the glory of God 
 and shewing His handy-work. 
 
 20. the moving creature| ‘The versions ren- 
 der reptiles. ‘The word is of wide significance, 
 most frequently used of reptiles and fishes; the 
 verb from which it comes, and which is ‘here 
 translated ‘‘ bring forth abundantly,” means 
 to swarm, to creep, to propagate itself rapidly. 
 We may probably therefore understand here 
 the insect creation, the fishes of the sea, and 
 the reptiles and saurians of sea and land. 
 
 that hath life] Literally perhaps, * Let 
 the waters swarm with swarms of the breath 
 of life.’ Let the waters teem with innu- 
 merable creatures, in which is the breath of 
 
 [v. 15—24. 
 
 bring forth abundantly the "moving 
 creature that hath ‘life, and fowltH 
 that may fly above the earth in the 
 topen firmament of heaven. 
 
 21 And God created great whales,/;,,, 
 
 sent ae 
 and every living creature that moveth, 777% 
 
 which the waters brought forth abun- 
 dantly, after their kind, and every 
 winged fowl] after his ae and God 
 saw that zt was good. 
 
 22 And God blessed them, saying, 
 
 ‘Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill ‘chap 8. 
 the waters in the seas, and let fowl Sia a 
 
 multiply in the earth. 
 
 23 And the evening and the morn- 
 ing were the fifth day. 
 
 24 4 And God said, Let the earth 
 bring forth the living creature after 
 his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, 
 and beast of the earth after his kind: 
 and it was so. 
 
 life. The word nephesh, which we have 
 rendered dreath, corresponds nearly with the 
 classical psyche, the vital principle. It is used 
 of the breath, of the living principle, of the 
 soul or seat of feelings and affections, and of 
 living beings themselves. 
 
 and fowl, &c.]| and let fowl fly. 
 
 21. great whales| Great sea mon- 
 sters. ‘The word is used of serpents, Ex. vii.9, 
 Deut. xxxii.33, Ps. xci. 13, Jer. li. 34, and of 
 the crocodile, Ezek. xxix. 3, xxxli.2. It is 
 not likely that the Israelites should have had 
 much knowledge of the larger species of whales 
 which do not frequent the shores of the Medi- 
 terranean. ‘Their early acquaintance with 
 Egypt had impressed them with a horror of 
 the crocodile, and in the desert they had 
 become familiar with large serpents. In 
 Is, xxvii. 1, and perhaps in Job vii. 12, this 
 name apparently belongs to sea monsters; but 
 we may remember that the Hebrews applied 
 the term sea to great rivers also, like the Nile 
 and the Euphrates. (See Is. xix. 5, Jer. li. 36, 
 Ezek. xxxii. 2, Nahum iii. 8.) It seems, on the 
 whole, most probable, that the creatures here 
 said to have been created were serpents, croco- 
 diles, and other huge saurians, though possibly 
 any large monsters of sea or river may be in- 
 cluded. ‘The use of the word created in this 
 place has already been remarked on v. 1. 
 Another reason for its use may be, that, as the 
 Egyptians paid idolatrous worship to croco- 
 diles, the sacred historian would teach that 
 they also were creatures of God. 
 
 24. The fifth day was chiefly occupied 
 in peopling the waters with fishes and reptiles, 
 
 Or, 3 
 ereeh ins 
 
 pay 
 
 t Heb. 
 face vA the 
 
Vv. 25, 26.] GENESEs. <1. 
 
 25 And God made the beast of the 
 earth after his kind, and cattle after 
 their kind, and every thing that creep- 
 eth upon the earth after his kind: and 
 God saw that zt was good. 
 
 ot 
 2Q ( And God said, * Let us make * chap. s. 
 man in our image, after our likeness: & o. 6. 
 and let them have dominion over the },°°" ™ 
 fish of the sea, and over the fowl of ae 4- 
 the air, and over the cattle, and over Col. 3, 10. 
 
 and the air with birds. The work of the 
 sixth day gives inhabitants to the land, 
 “cattle” (z.e. the well-known animals, which 
 afterwards became domesticated, though the 
 name was not exclusively attached to them), 
 “Cand creeping things,” such as serpents, lizards, 
 crawling insects and the like, ‘‘and beast of 
 the earth,” 7. e. either the wilder and fiercer 
 beasts, as distinguished from cattle, or perhaps 
 more generally animals of all kinds. 
 
 26. And God said, Let us make man] It 
 has been observed by commentators, both 
 Jewish and Christian (e. g. Abarbanel, iz /oc. 
 Chrysost. iz /oc.), that the deliberation of the 
 Creator is introduced, not to express doubt, 
 but to enhance the dignity of the last work, 
 the creation of man. So even Von Bohlen, 
 
 _ **A gradual ascent is observed up to man, the 
 
 eNOS IOC i ATCO PLCC LEO TON 
 
 chief work of creation, and in order to exalt 
 his dignity, the act of his creation is accom- 
 panied by the deliberations of the Creator.” 
 The creative fiat concerning all other creatures 
 runs, ‘‘ Let the waters bring forth abundantly,” 
 ‘Let the earth bring forth,” &c. Man is that 
 great ‘‘piece of work,” concerning which God 
 is described as taking forethought and counsel, 
 as making him in His own image, and (ch. ii. 
 7) as breathing into him the breath of life. 
 Three times in v. 27 the verb created is used 
 concerning the production of man; for, though 
 
 ‘his bodily organization may, like that of the 
 
 beasts, have been produced from already 
 created elements (‘‘the dust of the ground,” 
 ch. il. 7); yet the complex being, man, ‘‘of a 
 reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting,” 
 was now for the first time called into being, 
 and so was, unlike the beasts, wholly a new 
 creation. 
 
 Let us make] ‘The Jews vary much in their 
 explanation of these words. Philo speaks of 
 “‘the Father of all things addressing his own 
 powers” (‘De Profugis,’ p. 359). ‘The Tal- 
 mud says, ‘*The Holy One, Blessed be He, 
 does nothing without consulting the family 
 which is above” (Sanhed. c. iv.). Moses 
 Gerundinus says, that God addressed the 
 earth, for, as the earth was to give man 
 the body, whilst God was to infuse the spirit, 
 so ‘‘in our likeness” was to be referred both 
 to God and to the earth. Abenezra writes, 
 ‘When, according to God’s commandment, 
 the earth and the sea had brought forth 
 plants and living beings, then God said to 
 the angels, ‘Let us make man, we will be 
 occupied in his creation, not the seas and the 
 earth.’” So he considers man to have been 
 
 made after the likeness of the angels. To a 
 similar effect Maimonides, ‘More Nevochim,’ 
 p. ii. ch. 6. See Munster iz /oc., Cleric. ix /oc., 
 Heidegger, p. 32. 
 
 Some interpreters, both Jewish and Chris- 
 tian, have understood a plural of dignity, after 
 the manner of kings. ‘This is the opinion of 
 Gesenius and most of the Germans. But the 
 royal style of speech was probably a custom 
 of much later date than the time of Moses. 
 Thus we read Gen. xli. 41-44, ‘I have 
 set thee over the land of Egypt....I am 
 Pharaoh,” Indeed this royal style is unknown 
 in Scripture. Some of the modern rationalists 
 believe ae affect to believe) that the plural 
 name of God, Elohim, was a mere relic of 
 ancient polytheism, and that though Moses 
 habitually attaches a singular verb to the plural 
 nominative, yet here ‘‘the plural unconsciously 
 escaped from the narrator’s pen” (Von -Bohl.). 
 The ancient Christians with one mind see in 
 these words of God that plurality in the Divine 
 unity, which was more fully revealed, when 
 God sent His only begotten Son into the 
 world, and when the only begotten Son, who 
 was in the bosom of the Father, declared 
 Him to mankind. So e. g. Barnabas (ch. iv.), 
 Justin M., Irenzus, ‘Theophil., Epiphan. 
 (‘ Heres.’ xxxili. 4-2), Theodoret (‘ Quest. in 
 Gen.’). 
 
 in our image, after our likeness] Many 
 Christian writers think that nothing is meant 
 except that man was created holy and inno- 
 cent, and that this image of God was lost 
 when Adam fell. That holiness, indeed, 
 formed part of the likeness may be inferred 
 from Col. iii. 10, ‘‘the new man, which is 
 renewed after the image of Him that created 
 him;” but that the image of God was not 
 wholly obliterated by the fall seems clear 
 from Gen. ix. 6, Jas. lii. 9. And, if so, then 
 that image did not simply consist in perfect 
 holiness. Some, both Jewish and Christian, 
 have supposed that it referred to that do- 
 minion, which is here assigned to man. As 
 God rules over all, so man was constituted 
 the governor of the animal world. St Basil 
 M. in ‘Hexaemeron’ (qu. by Clericus) con- 
 siders that the likeness consisted in freedom 
 of will. This probably is a most important 
 point in the resemblance. The brute creatures 
 are gifted with life and will and self-con- 
 sciousness, and even with some powers of 
 reason; but they have no self-determining will, 
 no choice between good and evil, no power 
 of self-education, no proper moral character, 
 
 C2 
 
e 
 
 GHNESTS: 1. [v. 2731. 
 which zs upon the face of all the earth, 
 and every tree, in the which zs the fruit 
 of a tree yielding seed; “to you it *chap.9 
 shall be for meat. i 
 30 And to every beast of the earth, 
 and to every fowl of the air, and to 
 everything that creepeth upon the 
 earth, wherein therezs ‘life, [ have given | Heb. 
 every green herb for meat: and it sou. 
 was so. ’ 
 0 1 ° Ecclu 
 31 And ?God saw every thing that eee 
 
 36 
 
 all the earth, and over every creeping 
 
 thing that creepeth upon the earth. 
 27 So God created man in his own 
 image, in the image of God created he 
 ‘Matt.19. him ; “maleand female created he them. 
 Wisd. 2. 28 And God blessed them, and God 
 yi chap. 9. Said unto them, ” Be fruitful, and mul- 
 i tiply, and replenish the earth, and sub- 
 due it: and have dominion over the 
 fish of the sea, and over the fowl of 
 the air, and over every living thing 
 
 tHeb. that tmoveth upon the earth. he had made, and, behold, it was very, 
 Heb. : 29 { And God said, Behold, Ihave good. And the evening and the morn- 
 iid given you every herb ‘bearing seed, ing were the sixth day. 
 
 and so no true personality. God is the essen- 
 tially personal Being, and in giving to man an 
 immortal soul, He gave him also a true 
 personality, self-consciousness, power of free 
 choice, and so distinct moral responsibility. 
 
 NOTE A on Cuap. I. v. 5. 
 
 THE vexed question of the duration of the 
 days of creation cannot readily be solved from 
 consideration of the wording of this verse. 
 The English Version would seem to confine it 
 to natural days, but the original will allow 
 much greater latitude. ‘Time passed in regular 
 succession of day and night. It was an inge- 
 nious conjecture of Kurtz, adopted by Hugh 
 Miller, that the knowledge of pre-Adamite 
 history, like the knowledge of future ages, 
 may have been communicated to Moses, 
 or perhaps to the first man, in prophetic 
 vision, that so perhaps vast geological periods 
 were exhibited to the eye of the inspired 
 writer, each appearing to pass before him as 
 so many successive days. It has been said 
 moreover that the phenomena under the earth’s 
 surface correspond with the succession as de- 
 scribed in this chapter, a period of compara- 
 tive gloom, with more vapour and more car= 
 bonic acid in the atmosphere, then of greater 
 light, of vegetation, of marine animals and huge 
 reptiles, of birds, of beasts, and lastly of man. 
 (See Kurtz, Vol. I. p. xxvii. sq., Hugh Miller, 
 ‘Test. of Rocks,’ passim, &c.) In the present 
 condition of geological science, and with the 
 great obscurity of the record of creation in 
 this chapter, it may be wise not to attempt 
 an accurate comparison of the one with the 
 other. Some few points, however, seem 
 clearly to come out. In Genesis, first of all, 
 creation is spoken of as ‘‘in the beginning,” a 
 period of indefinite, possibly of most remote 
 distance in the past; secondly, the progress of 
 the preparation of the earth’s surface is de- 
 scribed as gradually advancing from the rocks 
 to the vegetable world, and the less perfectly 
 organised animal creation, then gradually 
 
 All this was accompanied at first with perfect 
 purity and innocence; and thus man was like 
 his Maker, intelligent, immortal, personal, with 
 powers of forethought and free choice, and 
 at the same time pure, holy and undefiled. 
 
 ON THE Days OF CREATION. 
 
 mounting up through birds and mammals, 
 till it culminates in man. ‘This is the course 
 of creation as popularly described in Genesis, 
 and the rocks give their testimony, at least in 
 the general, to the same order and progress. 
 The chief difference, if any, of the two wit- 
 nesses would seem to be, that the Rocks speak 
 of (1) marine plants, (2) marine animals, (3) 
 land plants, (4) land animals in their succes- 
 sive developements; whereas Moses speaks of 
 (1) plants, (2) marine animals, (3) land ani- 
 mals; a difference not amounting to diver- 
 gence. As physiology must have been nearly 
 and geology wholly unknown to the Semi- 
 tic nations of antiquity, such a general cor- 
 respondence of sacred history with modern 
 science is surely more striking and import- 
 ant than any apparent difference in details. 
 Efforts have been made to compare the In- 
 dian cosmogony with the Biblical, which 
 utterly fail. ‘The cosmogony of the Hindoos 
 is thoroughly adapted to their Pantheistic 
 Theology, the Hebrew corresponding with 
 the pure personal Monotheism of the Old 
 ‘Testament. ‘The only important resemblance 
 of any ancient cosmogony with the Scriptural 
 account is to be found in the Persian or Zo- 
 roastrian; which is most naturally accounted 
 for, first by the fact, which will be noticed 
 hereafter, that the Persians, of all people, ex- 
 cept the Hebrews, were the most likely to 
 have retained the memory of primitive tradi- 
 tions, and secondly, that Zoroaster was pro- 
 bably brought into contact with the Hebrews, 
 and perhaps with the prophet Daniel in the 
 court of Darius, and may have learned much 
 from such association. 
 
v.14] GENESIS. II. 37 
 
 2 “And on the seventh day God ¢ Exod. 
 ended his work which he had made; &,:",, 
 and he rested on the seventh day from Devt ss 
 all his work which he had made. Hens aoe 
 
 3 And God blessed the seventh day, 
 and sanctified it: because that in it 
 he had rested from all his work which 
 God tcreated and made. 
 
 4 4 These are the generations of 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The first sabbath. 4 The manner of the crea- 
 tion. 8 The planting of the garden of Eden, 
 10 and the river thereof. 17 The tree of 
 knowledge only forbidden. 19, 20 The nam- 
 ing of the creatures. 21 The making of wo- 
 man, and institution of marriage. 
 
 HUS the heavens and the earth 
 were finished, and all the host 
 of them. 
 
 — 
 
 t Heb. 
 created to 
 make, 
 
 Cuap. 11.3. And God blessed the seventh 
 day| ‘The natural interpretation of these words 
 is that the blessing of the Sabbath was imme- 
 diately consequent on the first creation of man, 
 for whom the Sabbath was made (Mar. il. 27). 
 It has been argued from the silence concerning 
 its observance by the patriarchs, that no Sab- 
 batic ordinance was really given until the 
 promulgation of the Law, and that this pas- 
 sage in Genesis is not historical but anticipatory. 
 ‘There are several objections, which seem fatal 
 to this theory. It is first to be observed, that 
 this verse forms an integral part of that history 
 of the creation, which, if there be any truth 
 in the distinction, is the oldest portion of the 
 Pentateuch, the work of the Elohist, very 
 possibly handed down from the earliest ages 
 of the world, and taken by Moses as the very 
 groundwork of his inspired narrative. Second- 
 ly, the history of the patriarchs extending 
 over at least 2500 years is all contained in the 
 book of Genesis, and many things must have 
 been omitted, much more memorable than 
 the fact of their resting on the Sabbath, which 
 in their simple pastoral life would seldom have 
 called for special notice. ‘Thirdly, there are 
 indications even in Genesis of a division of 
 days into weeks or hebdomades. ‘Thus Noah 
 is said twice to have waited seven days, when 
 sending the dove out of the ark, Gen. viii. 
 Io, 12. And the division of time into weeks 
 is clearly recognized in the history of Jacob, 
 Gen. xxix. 27, 28. The same hebdomadal 
 division was known to other nations, who are 
 not likely to have borrowed it from the 
 Israelites after the time of the Exodus. More- 
 over, it appears that, before the giving of 
 the commandments from Mount Sinai, the 
 Israelites were acquainted with the law of the 
 Sabbath. In Ex. xvi. 5 a double portion of 
 manna is promised on the sixth day, that 
 none need be gathered on the Sabbath. This 
 has all the appearance of belonging to an 
 acknowledged, though perhaps neglected, or- 
 dinance of Divine Service, not as if then for 
 the first time the Sabbath were ordained and 
 consecrated. ‘The simple meaning of the text 
 is therefore by far the most probable, viz. 
 that God, having divided His own great work 
 into six portions, assigned a special sacredness 
 to the seventh on which that work became 
 
 complete; and that, having called man into 
 being, He ordained him for labour, but yet 
 in love and mercy appointed that one-seventh 
 of his time should be given to rest and to the 
 religious service of his Maker. ‘This truth is 
 repeated in the Ivth Commandment, Ex. xx. 
 11; though there was a second and special 
 reason why the Jews should observe the 
 Sabbath day, Deut. v. 15: and very probably 
 the special day of the seven, which became 
 the Jewish Sabbath, was the very day on which 
 the Lord brought them from the land of 
 bondage, and gave them rest from the slavery 
 of Egypt. If this reasoning be true, all man- 
 kind are interested in the sanctification of the 
 Sabbath, though Jews only are required to 
 keep that Sabbath on the Saturday; and not 
 only has it been felt by Divines that the 
 religious rest of the seventh day is needful for 
 the preservation of the worship of God, but 
 it has been acknowleged even by statesmen 
 and physiologists that the ordinance is invalu- 
 able for the physical and moral benefit of 
 mankind. The truly merciful character of 
 the ordinance is fully developed in the Law, 
 where it is extended not only to the man- 
 servant and maidservant, but to the ox and 
 the ass and the cattle, that they also should 
 rest with their masters, Ex. xx. 10, Deut. v. 14. 
 
 which God created and made] Lit. ‘which 
 God created to make.” So the Targum 
 of Onkelos and the Syriac version render it. 
 The Vulgate has ‘‘which God created that 
 He might make it.” On the difference 
 between the verbs create and make see on 
 ch. i. 1. The natural meaning of the words 
 here is, that God first created the material 
 universe, ‘‘the heavens and the earth,” and 
 then made, moulded and fashioned the new 
 created matter into its various forms and 
 organisms. ‘This is the explanation of the 
 R. Nachmanides, ‘‘all His work which He 
 had created out of nothing, in order that He 
 might make out of it all the works which 
 are recorded in the six days.” (Quoted by 
 Fagius, ‘Crit. Sacri.’) 
 
 4. These are the generations, &c.] ‘The 
 Jews tell us, that, when these words occur 
 without the copulative and, they separate the 
 words following from those preceding, but 
 
GENESIS. Il. 
 
 the heavens and of the earth when 
 they were created, in the day that the 
 Lorp God made the earth and the 
 
 heavens, 
 
 that when they have the and, then they unite 
 with the preceding. It is apparent, that the 
 narrative proceeds in direct order from Gen. 
 i. r to this verse, ii. 4, and that from this 
 verse there is a return to the first formation 
 of plants and vegetables and to the creation 
 of man, a kind of recapitulation, yet with 
 some appearance of diversity. ‘This has been 
 noticed long ago. In the r7th century (1655) 
 Is. Peyreyrius wrote a book to prove, that 
 the account of the creation of man in ch. i. 
 related to a pre-Adamite race, from which 
 sprang a great majority of the Gentiles, 
 whereas the account in ch. ii. was of the 
 creation of Adam, the direct ancestor of the 
 Israelites and of the nations in some degree 
 related to them. ‘The book was condemned 
 and suppressed. Some modern writers have 
 more or less embraced its views, but it seems 
 that the whole Bible, both Old and New 
 Testament, refers to Adam as the head of the 
 whole human race, so that, if pre-Adamite 
 man existed at all, the race must probably have 
 been extinguished before Adam was created. 
 Moreover, ch. ii. 4 sqq. is evidently a conti- 
 nuation of ch. i., although there is a return 
 or recapitulation in vv. 4, 5, 6, 7, in order to 
 prepare the way for an account of Paradise 
 and the fall. See note at end of the chapter. 
 
 The word “generations,” toledoth, which 
 occurs for the first time in this verse, meets 
 us again continually at the head of every prin- 
 cipal section of the Book of Genesis. ‘Thus 
 ch. v. 1, we have “the book (or account) of 
 the generations of Adam,” in which the de- 
 scendants of Adam are traced to Noah. From 
 ch. vi. 9 we have the generations of Noah, 
 where the history of Noah and his sons is 
 given. In ch.x.1 we come upon the generations 
 of the sons of Noah, where the genealogical 
 table and the history of the descendants of 
 Shem, Ham, and Japhet are recorded. Ch. 
 xl. (Io—26) gives us the generations (or 
 genealogical table) of Shem. Ch. xi. 27 be- 
 gins the generations of Terah, the father of 
 Abram. Ch. xxv. 12 gives us the generations 
 of Ishmael. Ch. xxv. 19 the generations of 
 Isaac. Ch. xxxvi. 1, the generations of Esau; 
 XXxviil. 2, the generations of Jacob, which are 
 continued to the end of the book. 
 
 The word itself naturally signifies the gene- 
 ration or posterity of any one. It is used in 
 general to usher in a history of the race or 
 descendant of the heads of the great patri- 
 archal families. ‘The application of the word 
 here is very appropriate. ‘The primary crea- 
 tion of all things had just been recorded; the 
 
 [v. 5. 
 5 And every plant of the field be- 
 
 fore it was in the earth, and every 
 herb of the field before it grew: for 
 the Lorp God had not caused it to 
 
 sacred writer is about to describe more in de- 
 tail the results of creation. ‘The world had 
 been made; next comes a history of its na- 
 tural productions, its plants and trees, and 
 chief inhabitants. And as the history of a 
 man’s family is called the ‘‘ book of his gene- 
 rations,” so the history of the world’s produc- 
 tions is called ‘‘ the generations of the heavens 
 and the earth.” 
 
 avhen they were created] By these words 
 the inspired writer reveals the truth set 
 forth in the former chapter, that heaven 
 and earth were creatures of God, ‘the gene- 
 rations” referring to what is to come after, 
 not to what preceded, as though the universe 
 had sprung from generation or natural produc- 
 tion. 
 
 the LORD God] It has long ago been 
 observed that the sacred name JEHOVAH 
 occurs for the first time here in verse 4. The 
 Jews give as a reason, that the works being 
 now perfected, the perfect name of God, ‘the 
 Lorp God,” is for the first time adopted. It 
 seems most probable, that the sacred writer, 
 having in the first chapter recorded the crea- 
 tion as the act of God, giving to Him then 
 His generic name as the Supreme Being, now 
 passes to the more personal history of man and 
 his immediate relation to his Maker, and there- 
 fore introduces the more personal name of 
 God, the name by which He became afterwards 
 known to the patriarchs, as their God. ‘The 
 union of the two names JEHOVAH Elohim 
 throughout chapters 
 
 ments in Genesis, see Introduction to Genesis. 
 
 5. And every plant of the field} So the 
 LXX. and the Vulg. But the Targums, the 
 Syr., Rashi, and the most distinguished mo- 
 dern Hebraists, such as Rosenmiiller, Gese- 
 nius, &c., translate, “‘Now no plant of 
 the field was yet in the earth, and 
 no herb of the field had yet sprout- 
 ed forth; for the LORD God had not 
 caused it to rain upon the earth, 
 and there was not a man to till the 
 ground.” 
 
 _ It was objected long ago, and the objection 
 Is repeated with all its force by the German 
 critics of the day, that this is opposed to 
 ch. i.r1, where we read, ‘“‘ God said, Let the 
 earth bring forth grass,” &c. Hence it is 
 
Ye 64-8.) GENES Losein 39 
 
 o 
 
 rain upon the earth, and there was not 
 a man to till the ground. 
 
 6 But '!there went up a mist from 
 ; the earth, and watered the whole face 
 ~_. of the ground. 
 
 tof the ’dust of the ground, and breath- + Hep. 
 ed into his nostrils the breath of life; 2! 7M 
 and ‘man became a living soul. 21 Cor, 15. 
 
 8 | And the Lorp God planted a ¢4 cor. 
 
 garden eastward in Eden; and there ** ** 
 
 sz 
 
 7 And the Lorp God formed man 
 
 inferred that the first and second chapters 
 constituted two independent and contradic- 
 tory traditions, clumsily put together by the 
 compiler of Genesis. ‘The difficulty had been 
 anticipated by R. Nachman, who observes, 
 that this passage does not refer to the pro- 
 duce of the earth created on the third day, 
 but to those herbs and plants, which are raised 
 by the cultivation of man. L. de Dieu also 
 (¢ Critica Sacr.’ in loc.) notices, that the words 
 rendered plant, field and grew, never occur in 
 the first chapter, they are terms expressive 
 of the produce of labour and cultivation ; so 
 that the historian evidently means, that no 
 cultivated land and no vegetables fit for the 
 use of man were yet in existence on the earth. 
 
 the LORD God had not caused it to rain 
 upon the earth, and there was not .a man to till 
 the ground. (6). But there went up a mist, 
 &c.] It is objected here also, that the first 
 chapter speaks of the earth as enveloped in 
 waters and vapours, and that there could 
 therefore have been no lack of rain and mois- 
 ture. ‘The inconsistency is again more appa- 
 rent than real. In the first place, the mist, or 
 vapour, or cloud, here mentioned as watering 
 the ground, may perhaps tally well with that 
 watery condition of the atmosphere, of which 
 we read in ch.i. But next, the purpose of 
 ch, ii. is to give an account, not of the crea- 
 tion or adaptation of the whole earth, but of 
 the preparation of a special chosen spot for 
 the early abode of man. That spot may have 
 been in a region where little or no rain fell, 
 and which derived all its moisture from va- 
 pours or dews. It may not have been wholly 
 without vegetation, but it was not a culti- 
 vated field; no herbs, or shrubs, or fruit- 
 trees fitted for man’s use grew there; no rain 
 was wont to fail there (as some render it, 
 ‘not even a mist went up to water the 
 ground,” or more probably), ‘‘ yet there went 
 up a mist and watered the whole face of the 
 ground.” When the Creator made Adam, 
 that he might not wander about a helpless 
 savage, but that he might have a habitation 
 suited to civilized life, a garden or cultivated 
 field was planted for him, provided with such 
 vegetable produce as was best adapted to his 
 comforts and wants. 
 
 7. And the LORD God formed man of the 
 dust of the ground, &c.| Here again, as ini. 26, 
 27, the formation of man is ascribed to the 
 direct workmanship of God. In ch. i, God 
 
 he put the man whom he had formed. 
 
 is said to have created man in His own image, 
 because the production of a rational, personal, 
 responsible being clothed with a material 
 body was a new creation. Spiritual beings 
 existed before; animal natures had been called 
 forth from earth and sea; man had an animal 
 nature like the beasts, but his spiritual nature 
 was in the likeness of his Maker. So in this 
 chapter again the Creator is described as 
 forming man from the earth, and then breath- 
 ing into him a living principle. It is probably 
 not intended that the language should be phi- 
 losophically accurate, but it clearly expresses 
 that man’s bodily substance was composed 
 of earthly elements, whilst the life breathed 
 by God into his nostrils plainly distinguishes 
 that life from the life of all inferior animals. 
 All animals have the body, all the living soul, 
 ch. 1. 20, 21, but the breath of life, breathed 
 into the nostrils by God Himself, is said of 
 man alone. Cp. ‘‘the body, soul and spirit” 
 ef ancient philosophy and of the Apostle 
 Paul. 
 See note A at the end of this chapter. 
 
 8. a garden|] The versions render a 
 Paradise, which is a Persian word, signifying 
 rather a park than a garden, pleasure grounds 
 laid out with shrubs and trees. 
 
 in Eden| ‘The word Fden signifies de- 
 light, and the Vulgate renders a garden of 
 delight, a pleasure garden; but the word is a 
 proper name, and points to a region, the extent 
 of which is unknown. ‘Two countries are 
 mentioned in Scripture with the same name, 
 viz., one in Mesopotamia near the Tigris, 
 AK axix.22, Iseexkxvirey eZ XXxvier2 33 
 the other in the neighbourhood of Damascus, 
 Amos i. 5; but neither of these can be iden- 
 tified with the region in which Paradise was 
 placed. Much has been written on the site 
 of Paradise, but with no very definite result. 
 The difficulty consists in discovering the four 
 rivers mentioned in vv. 11, 12, 13, 14. It is 
 generally agreed that one, Phrath (v. 14) is the 
 Euphrates, and that another, Hiddekel, is the 
 Tigris, and so it is rendered by all the ancient 
 VSS. The name of the Tigris in Chaldee is 
 Diglath, in Syriac Diklath, in Arabic Dijlat, 
 all closely corresponding with Hiddekel, and 
 from one of them the word Tigris itself is 
 probably a corruption. ‘The following are 
 the principal opinions as to the names of the 
 other rivers, and consequently as to the site 
 of Paradise. 
 
40 
 
 GENESTS. 11. 
 
 9 And out of the ground made the 
 Lorp God to grow every tree that 
 is pleasant to the sight, and good for 
 
 1. Josephus identified the Gihon with the 
 Nile. 
 
 2. Calvin, Huet, Bochart, and others be- 
 lieved the river of Paradise to have been the 
 united streams of the ‘Tigris and Euphrates 
 called the Shat-el-Arab, which flows by Bas- 
 sora. Its four heads, on their shewing, would 
 have been, on the north, the two separate 
 streams of the Tigris and Euphrates, on the 
 south, Gihon, the eastern, and Pison, the 
 western channels, into which the united stream 
 again branches out below Bassora, before it 
 fails into the sea. Havilah would then be the 
 north-eastern part of Arabia, and Cush the 
 region of Kissia, Susiana or Chuzestan. A 
 general exposition of this view may be found 
 in Wells, ‘ Geog. of the O. T.,’ ch. 1. 
 
 3. J. D. Michaelis, Rosenmiiller, and Karl 
 Von Raumer, who appear to be followed by 
 Kurtz, identify Eden with the Armenian 
 highlands, making Pison to be the Phasis or 
 Araxes, and Gihon to be the Oxus, Havilah 
 is with them the country of the Chwalissi, 
 which is said even now to be called by the 
 Russians Chwaliskoje More. 
 
 4. Heidegger believed that Eden was a 
 portion of the Holy Land. 
 
 5. Others again find the site in India or 
 Circassia. 
 
 Of these opinions No. 1 is utterly untena- 
 ble. The identification of Gihon with the 
 Nile probably originated with the Alexandrian 
 Jews, who for the honour of their country 
 would have had the Nile to be one of the 
 rivers of Paradise. ‘This was confirmed by 
 the mistranslation of Cush into Ethiopia. It 
 is impossible, however, setting aside all ques- 
 tions of inspiration, that one so familiar with 
 Egypt as the writer of Genesis should have 
 conceived of the Nile as connected with the 
 Tigris and Euphrates. See Kurtz, ‘ Hist. of 
 Old Covenant’ (Clark’s Library), Vol. I. p. 73. 
 
 No. 2 has the advantage of pointing to a 
 single river, which might in primitive times 
 have been described as branching out into 
 four divisions or heads. Moreover, Arabia, in 
 which certainly was a region called Havilah, is 
 near to the western channel, whilst Chuzestan, 
 which may have corresponded with the land 
 of Cush, borders on the eastern channel. 
 
 The chief difficulty in No. 3 is that at pre- 
 sent there is no junction between the heads 
 of the four rivers, Tigris, Euphrates, Oxus, 
 and Araxes, though all may take their rise in 
 the same mountain system, and may possibly 
 in more ancient.times have been more nearly 
 related. ‘The question is one which has been 
 much discussed, and is not likely soon to be 
 set at rest: but the weight of argument and 
 
 [v. 9. 
 
 food; the tree of life also in the midst 
 of the garden, and the tree of know- 
 ledge of good and evil. 
 
 of authority seems in favour of No. 2, or 
 something nearly corresponding with it; and 
 it is the solution (more or less) adopted by the 
 best modern interpreters. 
 
 9. made the LORD God to grow] We 
 must understand this of the trees of Paradise 
 only. 
 
 the tree of life also in the midst of the 
 garden} Jewish and many Christian com- 
 mentators consider that there was a virtue in 
 this tree, which was calculated to preserve 
 from diseases and to perpetuate animal life. 
 Kennicott (‘Two Dissertat.’ Diss. i.) argued 
 that the word ‘‘tree” is a noun of number, 
 whether in the Hebrew or the Greek (comp. 
 Rev. xxii. 2), and that all the trees of Para- 
 dise, except the tree of knowledge, ‘the true 
 test of good and evil,” were trees of life, in 
 the eating of which, if man had not sinned, 
 his life would have been perpetuated continu- 
 ally. The fathers inclined to the belief that 
 the life to be supported by this tree was a 
 spiritual life. So St Augustine (‘ De Gen. ad 
 lit.’ vit. 4) says, ‘‘In other trees there was 
 nourishment for Adam; but in this a sacra- 
 ment,” z.e. The tree was a sacrament or mys- 
 tic image of, and perhaps also supporting, life 
 eternal. Its reference, not to temporal, but 
 to eternal life, seems to be implied in Gen. iii. 
 22. In Prov. iii. 18, Wisdom is compared to 
 the tree of life: and in Prov. xiii. 12, we read, _ 
 ‘‘'When the desire cometh, it is a tree of 
 life,” which connects it with the hope of the 
 future. And so perhaps we may say pretty 
 confidently, that whatever was the physical 
 effect of the fruit of this tree, there was a les- 
 son contained in it, that life is to be sought 
 by man, not from within, from himself, in 
 his own powers or faculties, but from that 
 which is without him, even from Him who 
 only hath life in Himself. God only hath 
 life in Himself; and the Son of God, who by 
 eternal generation from the Father hath it 
 given to Him to have life in Himself, was 
 typified to Adam under this figure as ‘the 
 Author of eternal salvation.” Joh. i. 4, xiv. 
 6, Rev. li. 7, xxii. 2 (see Fagius in loc. and 
 Heidegger, ‘ Hist. Patriarch.’ Exerc. Iv.). 
 
 the tree of knowledge of good and evil | 
 Onkelos paraphrases, ‘of the fruit of which 
 they who eat learn to distinguish between 
 good and evil.” The tree appears to have 
 been the test, whether man would be good 
 or bad; by it the trial was made whether 
 in keeping God’s commandments he would 
 attain to good, i.e. to eternal life, or by 
 breaking them he should have evil, z.e. eter- 
 
v. 10—17.] GENESIS! ©2t. AI 
 10 And ariver went out of Eden to 14 And the name of the third river 
 water the garden; and from thence is Hiddekel: that zs it which goeth 
 it was parted, and became into four !toward the east of Assyria. And the ! or, 
 heads. fourth river zs Euphrates. pip pds 
 
 clus. 1% The name of the first zs ¢ Pison: 
 
 ® that is it which compasseth the whole 
 
 land of Havilah, where there zs gold; 
 
 12 And the gold of that land zs 
 
 good: there is bdellium and the onyx 
 stone. 
 
 13 And the name of the second 
 
 15 And the Lorp God took !the ror, 
 man, and put him into the garden of sme 
 Eden to dress it and to keep it. 
 
 16 And the Lorp God command- 
 ed the man, saying, Of every tree 
 of the garden 'thou mayest freely 
 eat: 
 
 t Heb. 
 eating 
 thou shalé 
 
 river zs Gihon: the same 7s it that 
 compasseth the whole land of 'Ethiopia. 
 
 i et 
 
 nal death. ‘The lesson seems to be, that man 
 
 should not seek to learn what is good and 
 
 evil from himself but from God only; that 
 he should not set up an independent search 
 for more knowledge than is fitting, throwing 
 off the yoke of obedience and constituting 
 himself the judge of good and ill. Some have 
 thought that the tree had not this name from 
 the first, but that it was given it after the 
 temptation and the fall, either because the 
 tempter had pretended that it would give 
 wisdom, or because Adam and Eve, after 
 they had eaten of it, knew by bitter experi- 
 ence the difference between good and evil. 
 
 12. ddellium] a transparent gum obtained 
 
 ‘from a tree (Borassus flabelliformis) which 
 
 grows in Arabia, India, and Media (Plin. ‘H. 
 N.’ xu. 9.§ 19). This is the translation of 
 Aqu., Symm., Theod., Vulg.: Josephus and 
 many moderns, as Celsius (‘Hierob.’ I. 324), 
 Cleric. in loc. adopt it. The LX X. renders ‘the 
 carbuncle;” the Arabic, ‘‘sardius;” Kimchi, 
 Grotius, Bochart, Gesenius, and others, with 
 great probability take it to mean ‘“ pearls,” 
 of which great abundance was found in India 
 and the Persian Gulf, and this falls in well 
 with Bochart’s belief, that Havilah bordered 
 on the Persian Gulf. It appears far more 
 probable that it should mean either pearls or 
 some precious stone than a gum like bdellium, 
 which is of no great value. 
 
 the onyx Most of the versions give ‘‘onyx” 
 or ‘¢sardonyx;” Onkelos has ‘‘ beryl.” 
 
 13. Ethiopia} Cush, This isa word of 
 wide extent. It generally belongs either to 
 Arabia or to Ethiopia. From Gen. x. 7 sqq. 
 it will appear how widely the sons of Cush 
 spread forth: their first settlement appears to 
 have been in Arabia. Nimrod founded the 
 kingdom of Babylon. Afterwards they set- 
 tled largely in Ethiopia. In the more an- 
 cient books of Scripture, the Asiatic Cush is 
 more frequently, perhaps exclusively, intend- 
 ed. Later the name applies more commonly 
 
 I 7 But of the tree of the knowledge 
 of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of 
 
 to African Cush, z.e. Ethiopia. 
 
 14. toward the east of Assyria] ‘The 
 name Asshur included Babylonia, and even 
 Persia: see Ezra vi. 22, where Darius is called 
 King of Assyria: but in the time of Moses 
 probably Assyria proper would be under- 
 stood, a region of low land on the left bank 
 of the Tigris, perhaps only including the 
 country afterwards called Adiabene. It is 
 hardly correct to say, that the Tigris runs 
 ‘to the East of Assyria.” Perhaps the ren- 
 derings in some of the versions ‘‘ towards” or 
 ‘‘ before Assyria” may be correct. 
 
 17. thou shalt not eat of it] It has been 
 questioned why such a test as this should 
 have been given; whether it be consistent with 
 God’s goodness to create a sin by making an 
 arbitrary enactment; and how ‘‘the act of 
 eating a little fruit from a tree could be 
 visited with so severe a penalty.” But we 
 may notice that if there was to be any trial 
 of man’s obedience in Paradise, some special 
 test was almost necessary. His condition of 
 simple innocence and happiness, with no dis- 
 order in the constitution of his body or in 
 the affections of his soul, offered no natural 
 temptations to sin. Adam and Eve had none 
 but each other and their Creator near them; 
 and they could have had no natural inclina- 
 tion to sin against God or against their neigh- 
 bour. If we take the ten Commandments 
 as the type of the moral law, we shall find 
 none that in their state of healthy innocence 
 they could naturally desire to break (see Jo- 
 seph Mede, Bk. 1. Disc. 40). ‘Their position 
 was one of freedom indeed, but of depend- 
 ence. Their only danger was that they 
 should prefer independence upon God, and 
 so seek for themselves freedom in the direc- 
 tion of evil as well as in the direction of 
 good; and the renouncing dependence upon 
 God is the very essence of evil in the crea- 
 ture. Now the command concerning the 
 fruit of the tree, simple and childish as it may 
 appear, was one exactly suited to their sim- 
 
 eat. 
 
Co) NBR do. ald 
 
 42 
 
 it: for in the day that thou eatest 
 
 tHeb. _ thereof ‘thou shalt surely die. 
 
 ibis 18 And the Lorp God said, It 
 ts not good that the man should be 
 
 ¢Ecclus. alone; 1 will make ‘him an help ‘meet 
 
 feb. for him. 
 
 ae 436d 1g And out of the ground the Lorp 
 God formed every beast of the field, 
 and every fowl of the air; and brought 
 
 Or, them unto !Adam to see what he would 
 
 e man.  ~o1] them: and whatsoever Adam call- 
 ed every living creature, that was the 
 name thereof. 
 
 t Heb, 20 And Adam fgave names to all 
 
 cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and 
 
 [v. 18—23. 
 
 to every beast of the field; but for 
 Adam there was not found an help 
 meet. for him. 
 
 21 And the Lorp God caused a 
 deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he 
 slept: and he took one of his ribs, 
 and closed up the flesh instead thereof ; 
 
 22 And the rib, which the Lorp 
 
 God had taken from man, 'made he t Heb. 
 
 a woman, and brought her unto the ™ 
 man. 
 
 23 And Adam said, This zs now 
 bone of my bones, and flesh of my 
 flesh: she shall be called Woman; 
 
 because she was “taken out of man. 3°©"™ 
 
 ple and childlike state. Moreover it is not 
 inconsistent with God’s general dealings with 
 mankind, that he should at times see fit to 
 test faith and obedience by special and un- 
 usual trials. Compare Gen. xxii. 1, Matt. 
 XIX, 915 
 
 thou shalt surely die] St Jerome (‘Qu. 
 in Gen.”) proposes to adopt the translation of 
 Symmachus, ‘Thou shalt become mortal or 
 liable to death.” It is needless so to trans- 
 late, but the meaning of the threat probably 
 was that the effect of eating of the fruit of 
 that tree should be to poison the whole man, 
 soul and body, with a deadly poison, making 
 the body mortal, and the soul ‘dead in tres- 
 passes and sins.” With the day of trans- 
 gression a life commences, which is a living 
 death. St Paul uses the expression, ‘‘ Death 
 worketh in us.” There was, however, doubt- 
 less some remission of the sentence, so that 
 they did not die instantly, as was the case 
 with the Ninevites (Jonah iii. 10); and then 
 a remedy was provided which might ultimate- 
 ly turn the curse into a blessing. Still the 
 sentence was never wholly reversed, but the 
 penalty took effect at once. 
 
 19. the LORD God formed| The account 
 of the formation of the brute animals here 
 does not, as some have supposed, necessarily 
 imply that they were created after Adam; 
 but it is introductory to the bringing them 
 one by one to Adam that he may name them, 
 and it is intended to lead up to the statement 
 that they were none of them suited to be 
 Adam’s chief companions. They were form- 
 ed by God of earthly materials; but the 
 breath of Divine life had not been breathed 
 into them. 
 
 brought them unto Adam*to see what he 
 would call them| ‘The power of speech was 
 one of those gifts which from the first distin- 
 guished man from all other animals; but, as 
 tending to that civilized condition in which 
 
 it was God’s will to place Adam, in order to 
 mature his mental powers, and to teach him 
 the use of language, the animals are brought 
 to him that he might name them. Nouns are 
 the first and simplest elements of language; 
 and animals, by their appearance, movements 
 and cries, more than any other objects sug- 
 gest names for themselves. 
 
 20. there was not found an help meet for 
 him] ‘There is some obscurity in the origi- 
 nal of the words “an help meet for him;” 
 they probably mean ‘a helper suited to,” or 
 rather “‘ matching him.” 
 
 22. the rib...made He a woman] lit. The 
 side He built up into a woman, ‘The 
 word which primarily means ‘ rib” more fre- 
 quently signifies ‘‘ side:” whence many of the 
 rabbins adopted the Platonic myth (see Euseb. 
 ‘Prep. Evang.’ xl. 12), that man and woman 
 were originally united in one body, till the Cre- 
 ator separated them. The formation of woman 
 from the side of man is without question 
 most mysterious: but it teaches very forcibly 
 and beautifully the duty of one sex towards 
 the other, and the close relationship between 
 them, so that neither should despise or treat 
 with unkindness the other. ‘That respect for 
 the weaker sex, which we esteem a mark of 
 the highest refinement, is taught by the very 
 act of creation as recorded in the earliest ex- 
 isting record. The New Testament tells us 
 that marriage is a type of the union of Christ 
 and His Church; and the fathers held that 
 the formation of Eve from the side of Adam 
 typified the formation of the Church from 
 the side of the Saviour. ‘The water and 
 blood which flowed from that side were held 
 the one to signify baptism, the other to belong 
 to the other great Sacrament, both water and 
 blood cleansing from sin and making the 
 Church acceptable to God. 
 
 _ 23. Woman, because she was taken out of 
 
Vv. 24, 25.] 
 
 19. 24 *£Therefore shall a man leave 
 
 GENESIS. -Il. 
 
 25 And they were both naked, the 
 
 »7. his father and his mother, and shall man and his wife, and were not a- 
 cleave unto his wife: and they shall be shamed. 
 
 3 one flesh. 
 
 man] Hebrew ‘‘Ishsha because she was taken 
 out of Ish.” Hence many have argued that 
 Hebrew must have been the primitive lan- 
 guage. ‘The same, of course, is inferred from 
 other names, as Eve, Cain, Abel, &c., all 
 having appropriate significance in Hebrew. 
 The argument is inconclusive, because it is 
 quite possible to translate names from one lan- 
 guage into another, and to retain the meaning 
 which those names had in their original tongue. 
 
 NOTE A on CuapP. Il. v. 7. 
 
 24. Therefore, &c.] ‘These may have been 
 the words of Adam, or of the inspired his- 
 torian. Matt. xix. 5 seems to refer them to the 
 latter, which also is the more natural inter- 
 pretation. Then too they have more ob- 
 viously that Divine authority which our Lord 
 so emphatically ascribes to them. Such inci- 
 dental remarks are not uncommon in Scrip- 
 ture; see for instance ch. xxxil. 32. 
 
 ON THE IMMEDIATE CREATION AND PRIMITIVE 
 
 STATE OF MAN. 
 
 On the question of man’s direct creation in 
 distinction to the hypothesis of development, 
 and on his original position as a civilized 
 being, not as a wild barbarian, we may re- 
 mark, rst, It is admitted even by the theorists 
 themselves, that in the present state of the 
 evidence the records beneath the earth’s surface 
 give no support to the hypothesis that every 
 species grew out of some species less per- 
 fect before it. There is not an unbroken chain 
 of continuity. At times, new and strange forms 
 suddenly appear upon the stage of life, with no 
 previous intimation of their coming. andly, 
 In those creatures, in which instinct seems 
 most fully developed, it is impossible that it 
 should have grown by cultivation and suc- 
 cessive inheritance. In no animal is it more 
 observable than in the bee: but the working 
 bee only has the remarkable instinct of build- 
 ing and honey-making so peculiar to its race; 
 it does not inherit that instinct from its pa- 
 rents, for neither the drone nor the queen-bee 
 builds or works; it does not hand it down to 
 its posterity, for itself is sterile and child- 
 less. Mr Darwin has not succeeded in re- 
 plying to this argument. 3rdly, Civilization, 
 as far as all experience goes, has always been 
 learned from without. No extremely barba- 
 rous nation has ever yet been found capable of 
 initiating civilization. Retrogression is rapid, 
 but progress unknown, till the first steps have 
 been taught. (See Abp. Whately, ‘Origin 
 of Civilization,’ the argument of which has 
 not been refuted by Sir John Lubbock, ‘ Pre- 
 historic Man.’ Both have been ably reviewed 
 by the Duke of Argyll, ‘Primeval Man’). 
 Moreover, almost all barbarous races, if not 
 wholly without tradition, believe themselves 
 to have been once in a more civilized state, 
 to have come from a more favoured land, to 
 have descended from ancestors more enlight- 
 ened and powerful than themselves. thly, 
 
 Though it has been asserted without any 
 proof that man, when greatly degenerate, 
 reverts to the type of the monkey, just as do- 
 mesticated animals revert to the wild type; 
 
 43 
 
 yet the analogy is imperfect and untrue. Man 
 
 undoubtedly, apart from ennobling influences, 
 
 degenerates, and, losing more and more of the | 
 
 image of his Maker, becomes more closely as- 
 similated to the brute creation, the earthly 
 nature overpowering the spiritual. But that 
 this is not natural to him is shewn by the 
 
 fact, that, under such conditions of degene- | 
 
 racy, the race gradually becomes enfeebled, 
 and at length dies out; whereas the domesti- 
 cated animal, which reverts to the type of 
 the wild animal, instead of fading away, be- 
 comes only the more powerful and the more 
 prolific. ‘The wild state is natural to the 
 brutes, but the civilized is natural to man. 
 Even if the other parts of the Darwinian 
 hypothesis were demonstrable, there is not a 
 vestige of evidence that there ever existed any 
 beast intermediate between apes and men. 
 Apes too are by no means the nearest to us 
 in intelligence or moral sense or in their food 
 and other habits. It also deserves to be 
 borne in mind, that even if it could be made 
 probable that man is only an improved ape, 
 no physiological reason can touch the ques- 
 tion, whether God did not when the im- 
 provement reached its right point, breathe into 
 him ‘a living soul,” a spirit ‘‘which goeth 
 upward,” when bodily life ceases. This at 
 least would have constituted Adam a new 
 creature, and the fountain head of a new race. 
 On the derivation of mankind from a 
 single pair, see Prichard’s ‘ Physical Hist. of 
 Mankind,’ Bunsen, ‘ Philosophy of Universal 
 History,’ Smyth, ‘Unity of the Human 
 Race,’ Quatrefages, ‘L’unité de l’espece 
 Humaine,’ &c, ; 
 
 P. 
 
44 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 1 The serpent deceiveth Eve. 6 Man’s shame- 
 jul fall. 9 God arraigneth them. 14 The 
 serpent is cursed, 18 The promised seed. 16 
 The punishment of mankind. 2 Their first 
 clothing. 22 Their casting out of paradise. 
 
 OW the serpent was more sub- 
 
 til than any beast of the field 
 
 which the Lorp God had made. And 
 
 iHeb. he said unto the woman, ' Yea, hath 
 
 pce od said, Ye shall not eat of every 
 tree of the garden? 
 
 2 And the woman said unto the 
 serpent, We may eat of the fruit of 
 the trees of the garden: 
 
 3 But of the fruit of the tree which 
 is in the midst of the garden, God hath 
 said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither 
 shall ye touch it, lest ye die. 
 
 CHAP. III. 1. Noa the serpent] *‘ Almost 
 throughout the East the serpent was used as 
 an emblem of the evil principle,” Kalisch, ad 
 h. 1.: but Kalisch himself, ‘Tuch and others 
 deny that the evil spirit is to be understood 
 in this narrative of Genesis. Yet not only 
 did the East in general look on the serpent as 
 an emblem of the spirit of evil, but the earliest 
 traces of Jewish or Christian interpretations 
 all point to this. The evil one is constantly 
 called by the Jews ‘the old serpent,” Han- 
 nachash hakkadmoni (so also in Rev. xii. 9, 
 ‘that old serpent the devil”). In Wisd. ii. 
 24, we read, ‘‘ By the envy of the devil death 
 entered into the world.” Our Lord Himself 
 says, ‘‘the Devil was the murderer of man 
 from the beginning” (Joh. viii. 44). Von 
 Bohlen observes that “the pervading Jewish 
 view is the most obvious, according to which 
 the serpent is considered as Satan; and the 
 greatest confirmation of such an interpreta- 
 tion is the very general agreement of the Asi- 
 atic myths” (ad h.1.). Some have thought 
 that no serpent appeared, but only that evil 
 one, who is called the serpent; but then he 
 could not have been said to be *‘ more subtle 
 than all the beasts of the field.” The reason 
 why Satan took the form of a beast remark- 
 able for its subtlety may have been, that so 
 Eve might be the less upon her guard. New 
 as she was to all creation, she may not have 
 been surprised at speech in an animal which 
 apparently possessed almost human sagacity. 
 Fit vessel, fittest imp of fraud... 
 
 ..-For in the wily snake 
 
 Whatever sleights none wouldsuspicious mark, 
 
 As from his wit and nature subtlety 
 
 Proceeding, which in other beasts observed 
 
 Doubt might beget of diabolic power, 
 
 Active within beyond the sense of brute. 
 ‘Paradise Lost,’ Ix. 91. 
 
 GENESIS “TIE 
 
 etl 
 
 [v. r=; 
 
 4 *And the serpent said unto the et 
 woman, Ye shall not surely die: r Tim, 
 
 5 For God doth know that in the * 
 day ye eat thereof, then your eyes 
 shall be opened, and ye shall be as 
 gods, knowing good and evil. 
 
 6 And when the woman saw that 
 the tree was good for food, and that | 
 it was ‘pleasant to the eyes, and a t Heb 
 tree to be desired to make ome wise, © 
 she took of the fruit thereof, ’and sae 
 did eat, and gave also unto her hus- 1rim 2 | 
 band with her; and he did eat. pS 
 
 7 And the eyes of them both 
 were opened, and they knew that 
 they were naked; and they sewed fig 
 leaves together, and made themselves 1 or, 
 
 things 19 
 l aprons. sirdabout 
 
 5. God doth know] ‘The tempter repre- 
 sents God as envious of His creatures’ happi- 
 ness, the ordinary suggestion of false religion 
 and unbelief. ‘Then he suggests to Eve the 
 desire of self-dependence, that which is in fact 
 the origin of all sin, the giving up of depend- 
 ence on God, and the seeking for power, 
 wisdom, happiness in self. 
 
 as gods| Or more probably, **as God.” 
 The plural word Elohim stands at times for 
 false gods, at times for angels, but most com- 
 monly for the one true God. 
 
 knowing good and evil] Waving a clear 
 understanding of all great moral questions; 
 not like children, but like those of full age, 
 who ‘‘by reason of use have their senses ex- 
 ercised to discern both good and evil” (Heb. 
 v. 14). This was the serpent’s promise, 
 though he knew that the result would be 
 really a knowledge of evil through the per- 
 version of their own will and their own ill 
 choice. 
 
 6. to make one wise] Gesenius and others, 
 after the LXX. and Vulgate, render to Jook 
 upon. 
 
 7. the eyes of them both were opened, &c.] 
 ‘Their eyes were truly opened as the serpent 
 had promised them, but only to see that in 
 the moment when they departed from God 
 they became slaves of the flesh, that the free- 
 will and independence of God, and knowing 
 the good and the evil, delivers them up to the 
 power of evil. Man, who had his glorious 
 destiny before him of becoming by means of 
 the knowledge and love of God, and by obe- 
 dience, the free lord of the world, ceases, by 
 disobedience, to be master of himself.” (O. 
 Von Gerlach, ‘Comment.’ ad h. 1,). 
 
 jig leaves] Celsius, Tuch, and Gese- 
 nius, have doubted whether this was the Ficus 
 
v. 8—15.] 
 
 8 And they heard the voice of the 
 Lorp God walking in the garden in 
 the tcool of the day: and Adam and 
 his wife hid themselves from the pre- 
 sence of the Lorp God amongst the 
 trees of the garden. 
 
 g And the Lorp God called unto 
 Adam, and said unto him, Where art 
 thou? 
 
 10 And he said, I heard thy voice 
 in the garden, and I was afraid, be- 
 cause I was naked; and I hid myself. 
 
 11 And he said, Who told thee that 
 thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten 
 of the tree, whereof I commanded 
 thee that thou shouldest not eat? 
 
 Carica of Linnzus, supposing it to have been 
 
 the Musa Paradisiaca; but the word is that, 
 
 used throughout Scripture for the well known 
 fig tree (see Reediger in Ges. ‘Lex.’ p. 1490). 
 
 8. the voice of the LORD God| ‘The 
 whole of this history of the creation and the 
 fall is full of these anthropomorphic represen- 
 tations. ‘The Creator is spoken of as if con- 
 sulting about the formation of man (i. 26), as 
 reflecting on the result of His creation, and 
 declaring it all very good (i. 31), as resting 
 from His work (ii. 2), as planting a garden 
 for Adam (ii. 8), bringing the animals to him 
 to name them (ii. 19), then building up the 
 rib of Adam into a woman, and bringing her 
 to Adam to be his bride (ii. 22). Here again 
 Adam hears His voice as of one walking in 
 the garden in the cool of the day. All this 
 corresponds well with the simple and child- 
 like character of the early portions of Gene- 
 sis. ‘The Great Father, through His inspired 
 word, is as it were teaching His children, in 
 the infancy of their race, by means of simple 
 language, and in simple lessons. Onkelos has 
 here “The Voice of the Word of the Lorn.” 
 It is by this name, ‘‘the Word of the Lorp,” 
 that the Targums generally paraphrase the 
 name of the Most High, more especially in 
 those passages where is recorded anything like 
 a visible or sensible representation of His Ma- 
 jesty. The Christian fathers almost univer- 
 sally believed that every appearance of God 
 to the patriarchs and prophets was a manifes- 
 tation of the eternal Son, judging especially 
 from Joh. i. 18. 
 
 cool of the day| Lit. “wind of the 
 day,” which is generally understood of the 
 cool breezes of evening. Paradise had been 
 to man the place of God’s presence, which 
 brought heretofore happiness, and security. 
 Now that sin had come upon him, the sense 
 of that presence was accompanied with shame 
 and fear. 
 
 GENESIS. III. 
 
 12 And the man said, The woman 
 whom thou gavest to be with me, she 
 gave me of the tree, and I did eat. 
 
 13 And the Lorp God said unto the 
 woman, What zs this that thou hast 
 done? And the woman said, ‘The 
 serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. 
 
 14 And the Lorp God said unto 
 the serpent, Because thou hast done 
 this, thou art cursed above all cattle, 
 and above every beast of the field ; 
 upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust 
 shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 
 
 15 And I will put enmity between 
 thee and the woman, and between 
 thy seed and her seed; and it shall 
 
 14. cursed above all cattle] We can 
 hardly doubt that these words were in part 
 directed against the animal, which was made 
 the instrument of man’s ruin, as in the law 
 the ox which gored a man was to be put to 
 death like a malefactor. ‘Thus the serpent 
 was ever to bear about the remembrance of 
 that evil, which he had been made the means 
 of producing, was to be the enemy of man, 
 causing him suffering, but in the end suffer- 
 ing from him utter destruction; yet, as the 
 serpent was but the outward form of the 
 spirit of evil, so the language of the Al- 
 mighty, which outwardly refers to the ser- 
 pent, in its spiritual significance is a curse 
 upon the evil one. And as the curse is for 
 the sake of man; so in it is contained a pro- 
 mise that the human race shall finally triumph 
 over that which first caused its fall. The 
 most natural interpretation of the curse might 
 indicate, that the serpent underwent some 
 change of form. It would, however, be quite 
 consistent with the narrative, even in its most 
 literal acceptance, to understand that it merely 
 implied continued and perpetual degradation 
 coupled with a truceless war against man- 
 kind, 
 
 15. seed] Allix, as quoted by Bishop Pa- 
 trick, observes that in this promise God did a 
 kindness to Adam, who otherwise by the 
 temptation might have been estranged from 
 his wife; but here the promise of redemption 
 is through the seed of the woman. ‘‘ Mar- 
 riage, which had been the vehicle of the fall, 
 is now also to become that of salvation; the 
 seed of the woman is to bruise the head of 
 the Serpent.” (Kurtz, I. 78.) The promise 
 is, no doubt, general, that, though the seed 
 of the serpent (mystically Satan and all his 
 servants) shall continually wage war against 
 the descendants of Eve, yet ultimately by 
 God's appointment mankind (the whole seed 
 of the woman) shall triumph over their spi- 
 
 45 
 
46 GENESIS. IIL. [v. 16—19. 
 
 bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise 
 his heel. 
 
 16 Unto the woman he said, I will 
 greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy 
 conception ; in sorrow thou shalt bring 
 
 forth children; and thy desire shall be 
 
 1 Or, to thy husband, and he shall ‘rule 
 subject to 
 
 Vientaenover thee, 
 
 ae 17 And unto Adam he said, Be- 
 1 Cor. 14. 
 
 34. cause thou hast hearkened unto the 
 
 ritual enemy. If there were no more than 
 this in the language used, even so there would 
 be, an obscure indeed, but still a significant 
 promise of some future deliverance. But the 
 last words of the verse seem not merely 
 general but personal. In the first clause it 
 is said, that there should be ‘‘ enmity between 
 thy seed and her seed;” but in the second 
 clause it is said, ‘It (or he) shall bruise thy 
 head.” It was the head of the particular 
 serpent (not of the seed of the serpent only), 
 which the seed of the woman was to bruise. 
 And though we must not lay stress on the 
 masculine pronoun ‘‘ Ze,” because the word 
 for seed is masculine in Hebrew, yet there is 
 the appearance here of a personal contest, 
 and a personal victory. ‘This inference is 
 strengthened by the promise being made to 
 the seed of the woman. ‘There has been but 
 one descendant of Eve, who had no earthly 
 father; and He was ‘‘manifested that He 
 might destroy the works of the devil.” 
 Though the Jewish writers do not directly 
 interpret the promise of the Messiah; yet 
 the ‘T'argums of Jerusalem and of the Pseudo- 
 Jonathan both say that this victory over the 
 serpent shall be ‘‘in the days of the Messiah.” 
 
 It is well known that Roman Catholic 
 divines have attributed the victory to the 
 Virgin Mary, misled by the rendering of 
 some MSS. of the Latin, Ipsa, she. The 
 original Hebrew is perfectly unequivocal ; 
 for, though the pronoun might be so pointed 
 as to signify either 4e or she, yet the verb 
 is (according to the Hebrew idiom) mascu- 
 line. Moreover the LXX. has seed in the 
 neuter, but the pronoun referring to it, ‘ Ae,” 
 in the masculine, which would naturally refer 
 it to some individual son of the woman. 
 The Syriac Version also has a masculine pro- 
 noun. 
 
 shall bruise] ‘The LXX. followed by the 
 Vulgate and Onkelos has ‘shall watch,” 
 probably meaning to watch and track as a 
 hunter does his prey; but the word in Chal- 
 dee signifies ‘‘to bruise or crush.” In this, 
 or nearly this sense it is used in the only 
 other passages in which it occurs in Scrip- 
 Tire, viz. JOD 1X.a1 7. FS, CXXXIX, TX, and SO 
 
 voice of thy wife, and ‘hast eaten of the 
 tree, of which I commanded thee, say- 
 ing, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed 
 is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow 
 shalt thou eat ofit all the days of thy life ; 
 
 18 Thorns also and thistles shall 
 
 it tbring forth to thee; and thou shalt t Heb. © 
 eat the herb of the field; ent 
 
 19 In the sweat of thy face shalt 
 thou eat bread, till thou return unto 
 
 it is rendered by most ancient Versions and 
 Comm. as Syr. Sam. Saad. St Paul refers to 
 it in the words ‘‘The God of peace shall 
 bruise Satan under your feet shortly.” Rom. 
 XVi. 20. 
 
 16. Unto the woman He said| It is no- 
 ticed by Tertullian, that though God punished 
 
 _ Adam and Eve, He did not curse them, as 
 
 He did the Serpent, they being candidates for 
 restoration (‘ adv. Marcion.’ ii. 25). 
 
 I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy 
 conception| Some suppose this to be a hendia- 
 duoin for ‘‘the sorrow of thy conception.” 
 The words rather mean that woman’s sorrow 
 and her conception should both be multi- 
 plied. ‘The mother has not only the pains 
 of childbirth, but from all the cares of mater- 
 nity greater sorrow connected with her com- 
 mon offspring than the father has. The 
 threat of multiplying conception indicates, 
 not that Eve had already borne children, but 
 that childbirth would not have been un- 
 known had the first pair remained in Paradise. 
 
 Thy desire shall be| Desire here expresses 
 that reverential longing with which the weak- 
 er looks up to the stronger. The Vulgate 
 therefore renders, ‘‘ Thou shalt be under the 
 power of thy husband.” ‘This is also the in- 
 terpretation of Abenezra and of many moderns. 
 The comparison with ch. iv. 7 shews that there 
 is somewhat of dependence and subjection im- 
 plied in the phrases. 
 
 17. And unto Adam He said| Here for 
 the first time 4dam occurs without an article, 
 as a proper name. 
 
 cursed is the ground for thy sake| ‘The 
 whole earth partakes of the punishment, which 
 the sin of man, its head and destined ruler, 
 has called down. ‘The creature itself is sub- 
 jected to vanity, Rom. viii. 20. Death reigns. 
 Instead of the blessed soil of Paradise, Adam 
 and his offspring have to till the ground now 
 condemned to bear thorns and thistles, and 
 this is not to end, until the man returns to 
 the earth from which he was taken. Yet 
 even here there is some mark of mercy: for, 
 whereas the serpent is cursed directly, and 
 that with a reference to the earth he was 
 
>. 
 at. 
 
 Vv. 20—24. | 
 
 the ground; for out of it wast thou 
 taken: for dust thou art, and unto 
 dust shalt thou return. 
 
 20 And Adam called his wife’s 
 name ‘Eve; because she was the 
 mother of all living. 
 
 21 Unto Adam also and to his wife 
 did the Lorp God make coats of 
 skins, and clothed them. 
 
 22 4 And the Lorp God said, Be- 
 hold, the man is become as one of 
 us, to know good and evil: and now, 
 
 to travel over; here on the contrary the 
 earth, rather than the man, is cursed, though 
 for the man’s sake and with reference to him. 
 (Tuch.) 
 
 19. See note A at end of Chapter. 
 
 20. Eve] Chavvah, Life. Not only be- 
 cause she gave birth to all living, but perhaps 
 with a further prophetic meaning, in refer- 
 ence to the promise just given, because the 
 race of man, now subject to death, should 
 be made alive by the Offspring of the woman. 
 
 22. the man is become as one of us| 
 Man was not a mere animal, following the 
 impulse of sense, without distinction of right 
 and wrong. He had also a spiritual per- 
 sonality, with moral will and freedom of 
 forechoice. His lower nature, though in sub- 
 jection to the higher, as that was in subjec- 
 tion to God, yet acted as a veil, screening 
 from him what might have been visible to 
 pure spiritual intelligence: hence, though he 
 knew good from knowing God and living in 
 dependence on Him, yet he knew not evil, 
 having had no experience of it hitherto. His 
 fall therefore, although sinful, was not like 
 the sin of angels, who had no animal nature 
 to obscure vision or to tempt by sense, 
 Their fall must have been more deliberate, 
 more wilful, less pardonable. But, when 
 man by fatal mischoice learned that there 
 was evil in the universe as well as good, then 
 he had acquired a condition like to that of 
 spiritual beings, who had no veil to their 
 understanding, and could see both on the 
 right hand and on the left. The meaning 
 
 _ then of this mysterious saying of the Most 
 
 High may be, that now by sin man had 
 attained a knowledge like the knowledge of 
 pure spiritual existences, a knowledge which 
 God has of necessity, a knowledge which the 
 angels have, who might have fallen but who 
 
 NOTE A on Cwap. III. ¥. 19. 
 
 NoTuING can really be plainer than that the 
 narrative describes a most deplorable change 
 in the condition of the first parents of man- 
 kind, a change from a state of holiness re- 
 
 Gay NESiSay BLT, 
 lest he put forth his hand, and take 
 
 also of the tree of life, and eat, and 
 live for ever: 
 
 23 Therefore the Lorp God sent 
 him forth from the garden of Eden, 
 to till the ground from whence he was 
 taken. 
 
 24 So he drove out the man; and 
 he placed at the east of the garden. 
 of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming 
 sword which turned every way, to 
 keep the way of the tree of life, 
 
 stood upright, a knowledge, which evil angels 
 have from their own deliberate choosing of 
 evil instead of good. The difficulty of this 
 interpretation is, that it supposes God to 
 speak of Himself as One among other spi- 
 ritual beings, whereas He cannot be likened 
 to any one, but is infinitely above and beyond 
 all created natures. Some therefore would 
 understand here and elsewhere, the plural as 
 a mere plural of majesty. Still there is a 
 manifest plurality of person. It is not merely 
 ‘like Us,” but “like one of Us.” Hence it 
 was the universal belief of the early Christians, 
 that here as in Gen. i. 20, God was speak- 
 ing to, and of, His coeternal Son and Spirit. 
 See note B at end of Chapter. 
 
 lest he put forth his hand| Vatablus, who 
 looks on the tree of life as no more than 
 a mystical emblem, understands that it was 
 as though God had said, ‘‘ Lest he should 
 have a vain expectation excited in him by 
 laying hold of this symbol of My promise ; 
 that shall be taken from him which might 
 give him such a hope of immortality,” ad 
 h. 1. But Augustine, who spoke of the tree 
 of life as a sacrament, probably meant by a 
 sacrament something more than a mere em- 
 blem; and many of the fathers looked on 
 this judgment of God, whereby man was 
 excluded from the reach of that, which might 
 have made him immortal, as rather a mercy 
 than a judgment. [If his life had now been 
 perpetuated, it would have been an immor- 
 tality of sin. So Gregory Nazianzen says 
 the exclusion from the tree of life was ‘that 
 evil might not be immortal, and that the 
 punishment might be an act of benevolence.” 
 (Greg. Naz. ‘ Orat.’ XxXvII.n.1. See Pa- 
 trick). 
 24. Cherubims] See note C at end of 
 Chapter. 
 
 ON THE EFFECT OF THE FALL. 
 
 sulting from the presence of God and a life 
 in dependence on His support, to a state of 
 sin and shame following on disobedience to 
 His will and a desire to become independent 
 
48 
 
 GEN Sis eh 
 
 of Him. It is the distinctest possible ac- 
 count of a sin and of its punishment. More- 
 over in all subsequent teaching of Scripture 
 the whole human race is represented as shar- 
 ing in the exile of Adam from his Maker, 
 and hence in his sinfulness; for holiness and 
 happiness are inseparable from the presence 
 and the Spirit of God. It may be impossible 
 fully to explain all the justice or the mercy of 
 this dispensation. Yet we may reflect that 
 man was created a reasonable, free-willing, 
 responsible being. All this implies power to 
 will as God wills, and power to will as God 
 does not will. It implies too something like 
 a condition of trial, a state of probation. If 
 each man had been put on his trial separately, 
 as Adam was; judging from experience as 
 well as from the history of Adam, we may 
 see the probability that a large number of 
 Adam’s descendants would have sinned as he 
 sinned. The confusion so introduced into 
 the world would have been at least as great 
 as that which the single fall and the expulsion 
 once for all of our first parents from Paradise 
 
 NOTE B on CHAP. Ill, v. 22. ON THE 
 TATION AND 
 
 THE traditions of all, especially Eastern 
 nations, have more or less of resemblance 
 to the record of the first three chapters 
 of Genesis. ‘This is, according to some, to 
 be explained by mere similarity in all early 
 mythology. According to others it results 
 from the Hebrew histories borrowing the 
 myths of neighbouring countries and pro- 
 pounding them as historical truths. ‘There 
 can be no reasonable doubt, that the writer 
 of Genesis puts forth his history as history. 
 Hence some of the early rationalists admitted 
 an historical foundation, though they thought 
 it coloured by subsequent fancy. Eichhorn 
 for instance (‘ Urgeschichte,’ ‘Th. 2. B.2) sup- 
 posed that Adam dreamed of the formation 
 of Eve out of his side. Eve (as Abarbanel 
 had also imagined) saw the serpent eating 
 poisonous fruit, then ate of it herself and 
 gave it to her husband; and thus awakened 
 in them both sensual thoughts and the first 
 feelings of shame. A thunderstorm seemed to 
 them the voice of God; they fled in terror 
 from Paradise, and in the unkindliness of a 
 sterile land, the toils of agriculture and the 
 pangs of childbirth found a punishment for 
 their fault. But such forced explanations 
 soon gave way to mythical interpretation. 
 Paradise is but the golden age of the He- 
 brews; the tree of life is the Ambrosia or 
 Amrita of Greece or India; the tempter 
 finds a parallel in the contests of Krishna 
 with the serpent, or in the Persian myth of 
 Ahriman deceiving the first human beings 
 under a serpent’s form. ‘The Indian cosmo- 
 gony and the history of Krishna certainly 
 bear some resemblance to the Jewish history, 
 
 have actually brought in. And the remedy 
 
 would have been apparently less simple and 
 more complicated. As the Scripture history 
 represents it to us, and as the New ‘Testament 
 interprets that history, the Judge of all the 
 earth punished the sin of Adam by depriving 
 him of His presence and His Spirit (that 
 ‘original righteousness” of the fathers and 
 the schoolmen, see Bp. Bull, Vol. 11. Dis. v. 
 and Aquinas, ‘Summa,’ ii. r. qu. 82..art. 4), 
 and thus subjecting him to death. But 
 though He thus ‘concluded all under sin,” 
 it was indeed ‘‘ that He might have mercy on 
 all,” Rom. xi. 32. The whole race of man 
 condemned in Adam, receives in Adam also 
 the promise of recovery for all. And in the 
 Second Adam, that special Seed of the woman, 
 the recovery of the whole race is effected, 
 insomuch that as in Adam all died, even so 
 in Christ all shall be made alive. And thusin 
 truth the mystery of sin can only be cleared 
 up by the mystery of redemption ; whilst both 
 exhibit the justice of God brought out into its 
 fullest relief only under the light of His love. 
 
 HISTORICAL CHARACTER OF THE TEMP- 
 THE FALL. 
 
 though widely distinguished from it by the 
 gross Pantheism of the Hindoo Theology: 
 but that the Hebrews can owe nothing to these 
 is evident from the fact that they are not con- 
 tained in the Vedas and the most ancient 
 Sanscrit literature, from which alone it is 
 possible that even the later Jewish writers 
 could have borrowed. Indeed the history of 
 Krishna first appears in the ‘Bhagavat Gita,’ 
 a work assigned to the 3rd century af- 
 ter Christ, and which is supposed to have 
 drawn largely from Christian or Pseudo- 
 Christian sources. ‘The nearest resemblance, 
 however, is traceable between the Biblical 
 record and the teaching of the Zendavesta. As 
 there is a likeness in the history of Creation 
 and in the description of Paradise, so there is 
 a special similarity in the account of the fall. 
 According to the doctrine of Zoroaster, the 
 first human beings, created by Ormuzd, the 
 good principle, lived in a state of innocence 
 in a happy garden with a tree which gave 
 them life and immortality ; but Ahriman, the 
 evil principle, assuming the form of a serpent, 
 offered them the fruit of a tree, which he had 
 himself created ; they ate and became subject 
 to evil and to a continual contest between 
 light and darkness, between the good motions 
 of Ormuzd, and the evil suggestions of 
 Ahriman. As the Hindoo traditions are 
 disfigured by Pantheism, so are the Persian 
 by dualism; and both are markedly con- 
 trasted with the pure monotheism of the 
 Bible History. But Hartmann, Von Bohlen, 
 and other mythical interpreters, have imagin- 
 ed that the Mosaic account was really bor- 
 rowed from the Zoroastrian ; a theory which 
 
GE Nisa isa bul. 
 
 could only be established by proving that the 
 early chapters of Genesis were not written 
 till after the Babylonish captivity; for it was 
 then that the Jews first came into close con- 
 tact with the Persians, and might have bor- 
 rowed some of their superstitions. 
 
 Against so late a date the language of the 
 first chapter of Genesis is conclusive. ‘There 
 are indeed a few Aramaisms in Genesis; but 
 it has.heen ruled most justly, that ‘‘ Arama- 
 isms in a book of the Bible are proof either of 
 a very early or of a very late origin.” ‘The 
 Patriarchs, who came from Ur of the 
 Chaldees, may have naturally spoken a He- 
 brew not unmixed with Chaldaisms, and 
 some names, as that of Eve (Chava) and 
 that of the LORD (JEHOVAH), both of 
 which have a Chaldee or Aramaic form, could 
 not possibly have been invented later than 
 the age of Moses, unless they’ were invented 
 after the Babylonian Captivity, when the 
 Jews again came into contact with the Chal- 
 deans in Babylonia. ‘That the Aramaisms of 
 Genesis really mark antiquity, not novelty, 
 should almost be self apparent to one familiar 
 with the original. ‘The Hebrew of the first 
 three chapters of the Bible is most emphati- 
 cally archaic. It cannot therefore be a modern 
 Chaldaized Hebrew, but is a Hebrew so 
 ancient as still to retain strong traces of its 
 original union with its sister dialect Chaldee. 
 Its peculiar conciseness is the exact opposite of 
 the diffuse and verbose style of the Chaldee 
 in Daniel or Ezra. The 3rd verse of Genesis 
 owes much of its proverbial grandeur to this 
 very conciseness. So many thoughts are 
 perhaps nowhere else in the world uttered in 
 so few syllables. ‘The very reverse of this is 
 true of the language when it had become 
 infected by the Chaldee of the Captivity. 
 But, if the legends of the Zendavesta were 
 not borrowed by the Jews in their captivity, 
 then the real contact point between them 
 and the Jewish history must be found in 
 pre-Mosaic times, in the days of the early 
 
 more. ov CHAP, IIT. Vv. 24: 
 
 patriarchs; and then the fact, that the tradi- 
 tions of Persia were of all others the nearest 
 to the Jewish traditions may easily be ex- 
 plained. Let us suppose the account in 
 Genesis to be the great Semitic tradition. 
 perhaps delivered direct from Shem to Abra- 
 ham, from Abraham to Jacob, from Jacob 
 to Joseph, and incorporated under Divine 
 guidance by Moses in his history. Is it 
 unlikely that Japhet may have given the very 
 same account of his own posterity? and 
 where would it have been so well preserved, 
 as in Iran, that spot, or at least near to that 
 spot, where the Aryan races seem longest to 
 have dwelt together, and where the tradition 
 was most likely to have been undisturbed 
 by constant migrations? ‘The Persians prided 
 themselves on their pure and ancient de- 
 scent ; and modern ethnologists have given 
 to those tribes which peopled India and 
 Europe the name of Aryan, after the inhabit- 
 ants of Iran and the noblest race among 
 them, the Ari. Ifthe Hebrews retained the 
 Semitic tradition pure and _ uncorrupted, 
 through their adherence to the worship of 
 the true God, whilst the Persians had the 
 Japhetic tradition, though corrupted by dual- 
 ism, the resemblance between their respective 
 accounts would be in every way natural, 
 and the real historical basis of them both 
 would be the simplest solution of the diffi- 
 culty. 
 
 It may only be necessary to add that this 
 reasoning will not be affected, even if we 
 should concur with those who argue, that 
 the history of the fall is a true history though 
 veiled under allegorical imagery, 7.e. that 
 Adam and Eve were created innocent and 
 holy, that they were subjected to a trial and 
 fell under it, thereby bringing in sin and 
 death upon mankind, but that the description 
 given of this in Genesis is not literal but 
 emblematical and mystical (see for instance 
 Quarry ‘on Gen.’ p. 112, and Warburton 
 quoted by him). 
 
 CHERUBIM. 
 
 (1) Traditional accounts of the Cherubim. (2) Cherubim figured in Tabernacle and Temple. 
 
 (3) Cherubim seen in visions of Isaiah, Ezekiel, St John. 
 
 (5) Etymology of name. 
 
 In this passage the Cherubim appear to be 
 living beings, angels of God, fulfilling the will 
 of God. Elsewhere (except in brief allu- 
 sions as Ps. xviii. 10; 2 Sam. xxii. 11) we find 
 them as sculptured or wrought figures in the 
 Tabernacle and the Temple; or as images in 
 the visions of prophets, which visions have al- 
 ways more or less of the other imagery of the 
 Temple presented in them (Ez. i. x; Rev. iv. 
 and perhaps Is. vi.). 
 
 Tradition gives no satisfactory account of 
 the appearance of these cherubic figures. Jo- 
 sephus, (‘ Ant.’ 111. 6. § 5) says that they were 
 ‘‘winged animals in form like nothing seen 
 
 Deri. 1, 
 
 (4) Cherubim of Paradise. 
 
 by man.” It is possible that Josephus’ Pha- 
 risaic prejudice in interpreting the second com- 
 mandment may have led him to this profession 
 of utter ignorance concerning the forms of the 
 Cherubim, for he charges Solomon witha breach 
 of the law on account of the oxen under the 
 brazen sea (‘ Ant.’ viii. 7. § 3), and in the face 
 of Exod. xxvi. 31 (compared with Ezek. x. 20), 
 he denies that the veil of the tabernacle had any 
 living creatures on it (‘ Ant.’ 111. 3. § 6). Still 
 the Apostle (Heb. ix. 5), who speaks of “the 
 Cherubim of glory shadowing the mercy seat,” 
 adds, ‘‘of which we cannot now speak par- 
 ticularly,” as though, after the captivity and 
 D 
 
 49 
 
GENESIO ITE 
 
 the destruction of the first Temple, not only 
 had the sacred figures never been restored, but 
 even the memory of their shapes had been 
 lost. 
 
 1. The Tabernacle and the Temple] When 
 Moses is commanded to make the ark, we 
 learn that he was to make the Capporeth, 
 the mercy seat or covering of the ark, of 
 pure gold, and Cherubim looking towards 
 the mercy seat, stretching forth their wings 
 on high to cover the mercy seat. ‘The Che- 
 rubim were to be of a piece with the mercy 
 seat, or at least of the same material (Ex. 
 Xxv. 17-20). There is no appearance of 
 more than one face to each Cherub, nor of 
 more than two wings. The Cherubim on 
 the mercy seat in the Tabernacle appear to 
 have been exactly imitated by Solomon in 
 the Temple, unless they were the very Cheru- 
 bim of the Tabernacle removed to the Temple. 
 Their height is said to have been ten cubits, 
 and their wings touched the walls on either side 
 (1 K. vi. 27). Besides the two Cherubim on the 
 mercy seat, figures of Cherubim were wrought 
 on the curtains of the Tabernacle (Ex. xxvi. 
 I, 31, Xxxvi. 8, 35), and were afterwards 
 engraven on the walls and doors of the ‘Tem- 
 ple, along with palms and flowers, (1 K. vi. 
 29, 32, 35): also on the bases of the ten lavers, 
 on the borders that were between the ledges 
 were “lions, oxen and Cherubims.” (1 K. vii. 
 29). ‘Then again were four wheels a cubit 
 and a half high, and again we find ‘‘ Cheru- 
 bims, lions and palm trees.” (v. 36.) 
 
 The special offices of the Cherubic figures 
 inthe ‘Tabernacle appear to have been, first, 
 the watching and guarding of the ark and 
 the sacred law deposited within the ark, to- 
 wards which they are represented as look- 
 ing and over which they spread their out- 
 stretched wings, and secondly, to attend and 
 bear up that mystic presence of God, which 
 appeared in the Cloud of glory over the 
 mercy seat. That Cloud of glory had led 
 Israel through the Red Sea and the wilder- 
 ness, the guide and guardian of God’s people, 
 the symbol of His presence, especially in the 
 giving of the law, having a twofold aspect, at 
 times as darkness, at times as a pillar of 
 light; now a glory settling on the Taber- 
 nacle or resting above the ark, at another 
 time accompanied with fire and lightnings, so 
 that the people durst not look on it. (Ex. 
 Reet) 22s °XiV. 19,24, XVL. 10, xix, 167 28, 
 Raeeks 28) XXIV. 16, 17; XXXill. 9, XXXIV os, 
 XXXVI. 6—9, xl. 34—38; Num. ix. 15—23, 
 xii. 5—I0, XVi. Ig —42). When the Taber- 
 nacle is set up, the Law is deposited in the 
 Ark, the cloud is promised to rest upon the 
 covering of the Ark, and, as the Cherubim 
 guard the Law and the Testimony of God, 
 so they may be supposed reverently to sur- 
 round the throne of His glory. 
 
 If we went no farther, we should natu- 
 rally conclude, that the Cherubim were wing- 
 ed human figures, sculptured in the Taber- 
 
 nacle and the Temple, representing either 
 the personal angels of God, or at least those 
 ministers and agents of His in creation which 
 do His pleasure and wait upon His will. 
 We should infer, that their offices were (1) 
 to guard what is sacred and unapproachable, 
 the gate of Paradise (Gen. ili. 24), the ark of 
 the covenant of the Lorp, in which were 
 deposited the two tables of the Law (com- 
 pare Ezek. xxvili. 1416, where the Prince 
 of Tyre is compared to a Cherub, who in 
 Eden covers with his wings the precious 
 stones): (2) to surround the mystic throne 
 of God and to attend His presence (hence 
 the Most High is constantly spoken of as 
 dwelling between the Cherubim, i.e. by His 
 Shechinah on the mercy seat, 1 S. iv. 4; 
 2S. vi, 23 2% K. xix. 355 Seis 
 1; Is. xxxvii. 16): (3) perhaps to bear up 
 the throne of God upon their wings, and 
 to carry Him when He appeared in His 
 glory, (Comp. 2 S. xxii, 11; Ps. xviii, Io, 
 ‘‘ He rode upon a Cherub, and did fly: yea, 
 He did fly upon the wings of the wind.”) 
 
 2. The visions of Isaiah, Ezekiel and St 
 John] It is doubtful whether the Seraphim 
 in the vision of Isaiah ch. vi. (the only place 
 in which they are named in Scripture) be the 
 same as the Cherubim or not. ‘The scene 
 is the same as in the Cherubic visions of 
 Ezekiel and St John, viz. in the Temple (vv. 
 1. 6). The Seraphim occupy a place like 
 that of the Cherubim, viz. just by the 
 Throne of God; and their taking the live 
 coal from the altar seems to connect them with 
 the burning coals of Ezekiel’s Cherubim (Ez. 
 i. 13). As far as we can judge these Sera- 
 phim resemble the Cherubim of the ‘Taber- 
 nacle and the Temple in having human forms 
 and single faces, but they have six wings 
 each: ‘* With twain he covered his face, 
 and with twain he covered his feet, and with 
 twain he did fly.” 
 
 We come now to the visions of Ezekiel 
 and St John. ‘These visions also have their 
 seat in the Temple as the image of Heaven. 
 (See Ezek. x. 2, 3, 5, 18, where we meet 
 with the altar fire and the courts of the Tem- 
 ple: and Rev. passim, where all the imagery 
 is drawn from the Temple, e.g. the candle- 
 stick ch. i. 12, the High Priest ch. i. 13, the 
 altar ch. vi. 9, &c.) In both visions the 
 throne corresponds with the place on which 
 the Cloud of glory rested between the Che- 
 rubim. The Cherubim then are described 
 as living creatures (Ezek. i. 5; Rev. iv. 6), 
 in the form of a man (Ezek. i. 5) with four 
 (Ezek. i. 8, ii. 23, x. 7, 8—21), or with six 
 wings (Rev. iv. 8), having eyes all over 
 (Ezek. i. 18, x. 12; Rev. iv. 8), In Ezekiel 
 they have each four faces, viz. of a man, of a 
 lion, of an ox, of an eagle (Ezek. i. 10, x. 
 16). In St John they have but one face 
 each, these faces being respectively of a man, 
 of a lion, of a calf and of an eagle (Rev. iv. 
 7). Their feet appear to Ezekiel as straight 
 
 <i 
 
Ge NESTS; 
 
 feet, like the feet of oxen (Ezek. i. 7), In 
 Ezek. x. 14, we have the very singular phe- 
 nomenon that the face of a Cherub seems 
 identified or synonymous with the face of a 
 calf or an ox. (Comp. Ezek. i. 10; Rev. iv. 
 7.) It is thought by many, that in these 
 latter visions we have a fuller description of 
 the Cherubim of the Tabernacle and the 
 Temple than we could gather from the 
 earlier accounts in Holy Scripture. It is 
 supposed that they too, like the Cherubim 
 in the visions, must have been composite 
 creatures, if of human form, yet with heads 
 of other animals, either as described by Eze- 
 kiel or by St John. Moreover, as such com- 
 posite figures must plainly have been emblem- 
 atical, it has been thought that the Cheru- 
 bim by their faces of a man, a lion, a bull 
 and an eagle, perhaps expressed the strength 
 and wisdom of the Divine Majesty, or per- 
 haps the strength and the swiftness, with 
 which His ministers do His will. Again, as 
 they surround the throne and guard the Law 
 of the Most High, so perhaps we may un- 
 derstand, that the natural and the spiritual 
 creation being knit up together in one great 
 scheme, these symbolic creatures indicate that 
 all things, all creation, wait upon God, all 
 do His will, all work together for good to 
 the godly and for judgment on the un- 
 godly. ‘They guard His law, and execute 
 its judgments, and keep off the sinner from 
 the blessing of its rewards. 
 
 The existence of composite winged em- 
 blematical figures amongst nations more or 
 less connected with the Hebrews is now well 
 known. The Sphinx and the Griffin have 
 long been familiar to us: but it has been re- 
 marked as singular that Mr Layard should 
 have discovered in Nineveh gigantic winged 
 bulls with human heads, winged lions, and 
 human figures with hawk or eagle heads, cor- 
 responding so nearly with the winged Cheru- 
 bim of the visions of Ezekiel and St John. 
 These gigantic figures too are generally placed 
 as guards or sentinels at the entrances of tem- 
 ples and palaces, like the guarding Cherubim 
 of Holy Writ. Moreover, they are evidently 
 not objects of idolatrous worship, but appear 
 rather as worshippers than as divinities. It 
 is argued, that it is not improbable that Mo- 
 ses should have adopted similar emblems, op- 
 posing the true worship to the false, and 
 placing in the temple of the true God em- 
 blems of protection, watchfulness, power, and 
 glory, similar to those used in the temples of the 
 gods of the nations. (See Lammert, ‘ Die Che- 
 rubim’ in ‘ Jahrbiicher ftir Deutsche Theol.’ 
 Zwolfter Band, Viertes Heft, Gotha, 1867). 
 It is, however, to be observed, that nothing 
 connects Moses with Assyria or the Assyrian 
 sculptures: and indeed those found by Mr 
 Layard in the Temple of Kojundjik, which 
 are most to the point, are not considered by 
 him to be of great antiquity. Far more likely 
 
 sid lip 
 
 is it that some Egyptian type should have 
 been followed: and we find in the Egyptian 
 Sculptures, and in the 18th dynasty, which 
 was probably the dynasty of the Exodus, ex- 
 amples of a shrine or ark wonderfully calcu- 
 lated to remind us of the ark of the Covenant 
 made by Moses, It is carried by persons of 
 the sacerdotal race, by staves, as the Levites 
 carried the ark. In the centre is the symbol 
 of the Deity, and two winged human figures 
 spread out their wings around and over it. 
 (Lepsius, ‘Denkm.’ 111. Bl. 14.) These two 
 figures, however, represent the goddess Ma, 
 under the two-fold notion of ‘justice’ and 
 ‘‘truth.” This is clear from the ostrich fea- 
 thers on the heads of the figures. ‘This god- 
 dess is often called ‘‘the double Ma,” and it 
 is very doubtful, whether, notwithstanding 
 this apparent similarity, there is any relation 
 between these figures and the Cherubim of the 
 Tabernacle. 
 
 What then is to be said of the vision of 
 Ezekiel and of St John who nearly repeats 
 the imagery in Ezekiel? We may observe, 
 that Ezekiel was a priest (Ezek. i. 3). He 
 was therefore probably familiar with the 
 sculptures in the Temple, especially the Che- 
 rubim carved on the bases of the ten lavers, 
 along with bulls and lions, and with four 
 wheels curiously connected with them. His 
 vision, the scene of which was the Temple, 
 naturally was mixed up with objects in the 
 Temple. The connection of his Cherubic 
 figures with wheels is explained by 1 Kings 
 Vil. 29, 30, 33. Even the lion and bull-heads 
 of these figures may have come from the 
 mingling of the Cherubim with the bulls and 
 lions in the Temple. But, besides this, he saw 
 these visions by the river Chebar in the land 
 of the Chaldeans; and there he and his people 
 would, no doubt, have become familiarized 
 with the gigantic winged guardians of the 
 temples and the palaces in Babylonia and As- 
 syria, the bulls and lions and eagle-headed 
 men, and human-headed bulls. It is highly 
 probable that the difference between the Che- 
 rubim in Ezekiel’s vision (repeated with cer- 
 tain variations in St John’s), and the Cheru- 
 bim in the Tabernacle and the Temple re- 
 sulted in part from this. In God’s dealings 
 with man, He constantly uses for lessons 
 things just before men’s eyes. And so He 
 may have done in this case with Ezekiel. It 
 is almost certain that Ezekiel’s visions did not 
 represent accurately that to which he had 
 been used in the Temple. Hence he appears 
 not at first to have recognized them as being 
 Cherubim; but at the end of his second vision 
 he tells us, that now he knew they were Che- 
 rubim (Ezek. x. 20). ‘To Moses, on the other 
 hand, but still on the same principle, God had 
 dictated the carving of figures like those 
 which he had seen in Egypt, figures emblem- 
 atical of guardianship, and of the reverence 
 of those who wait constantly upon God, but 
 
 D2 
 
52 
 
 GE NESTS. ON: 
 
 which had never been objects of idolatrous 
 worship. ‘Thus He sanctioned, or at least 
 tolerated, that which seems so dear to re- 
 ligious humanity, the use of symbolism, where 
 dangers from its abuse were not great. We 
 conclude, therefore, notwithstanding much 
 authority to the contrary, that in all proba- 
 bility the Cherubim of glory shadowing the 
 mercy seat were winged human figures, with 
 human faces too. 
 
 The Cherubim of Paradise] It is noticed 
 that Moses describes the placing of the Che- 
 rubim at the gates of Eden in words suggest- 
 ed by that which he had to carve in the 
 Tabernacle. ‘He placed...Cherubim” is in 
 the Hebrew }3¥2 ‘‘He made to dwell,” a 
 term specially belonging to the dwelling of 
 the glory of God in the Shechinah, the cloud 
 of glory. And the Paradise Cherubim were 
 to keep, lit. ‘to guard,” (10W>) the way 
 to the tree of life, as the Cherubim in the 
 Tabernacle guarded the Ark of the Covenant. 
 Those, who believe the Cherubim in the Ta- 
 bernacle to have been like those seen by Eze- 
 kiel, naturally believe also that they were but 
 emblems of those powers of nature and crea- 
 tion by which the Creator so constantly 
 works His will. ‘The Cherubim and the 
 flaming sword at the East Gate of Paradise 
 to them mean only that the way back to 
 Eden and to the tree of life was closed by 
 such natural hindrances as the Author of na- 
 ture saw fit to interpose. It is not impossible 
 that even if the Cherubim of the Tabernacle 
 were not composite creatures, but simply 
 winged human figures, much the same may 
 have been meant. ‘There are doubtless hosts 
 of spiritual beings that surround the throne of 
 God and do His will; but all things serve Him. 
 He maketh the winds His angels, and a flame 
 of fire His ministers. ‘The stern, mechanical, 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 1 The birth, trade, and religion of Cain ana 
 Abel. 8 The murder of Abel. 11 The curse 
 of Cain. 17 Enoch the first city. 19 Lamech 
 and his two wives. 25 The birth of Seth, 26 
 and Enos. 
 
 ND Adam knew Eve his wife; 
 
 and she conceived, and bare 
 
 Cuap. IV. 1. The last Chapter was a 
 history of the first birth of sin; this gives us 
 an account of its developement, as also of the 
 first out-spreading of the human race. Cain 
 and Abel are respectively types of the two 
 opposing principles discernible throughout the 
 sacred history; Cain of the unchecked domi- 
 nion of evil, Abel of the victory of faith. 
 
 Ihave gotten a man from the LORD] LXX. 
 ‘‘by means of the Lord;” Onk. ‘from 
 the Lord;” Syriac “for the Lord ;” Pseudo- 
 
 [v. 1—3. 
 
 turning every way of the sword of flame per- 
 haps points to this; and the sacred writer 
 may possibly have signified under the symbols 
 of angelic beings the great ministering powers 
 of nature. 
 
 This at least is taught us by the Cherubim 
 guarding the way to the Tree of life. Para- 
 dise had been lost ‘by sin; but it was not gone 
 for ever. The tree of life, and the garden 
 where it grew, were still in full glory under 
 the keeping of God and of His holy angels. 
 The forfeited life is not irrecoverable: but it 
 can only be recovered through fighting and 
 conquest, suffering and death. ‘There were 
 between it and man the ministers of righteous 
 vengeance and the flaming sword. 
 
 The Etymology of the word Cherub is very 
 obscure. Some derive it from 373 (Cherab) 
 ‘to plough,” it being inferred from Ezek. i. 
 Io compared with x. 14, that the true Cherub 
 form was that of an ox. Others compare 
 a1}? (Kerob) “near,” i.e. admitted to the 
 special presence of God. The Talmudists as- 
 sert that the name signifies ‘“‘a child,” and 
 that the faces of the Cherubim were the faces 
 of children. Eichhorn and others compare 
 the Greek ypu, ypuios, from the Persian 
 greifen **to hold,” and consider the name to 
 be nearly equal in significance, as well as in 
 derivation, with the fabulous Griffin or Gry- 
 phon of the East. Gesenius suggests the 
 root 293 (Charab)=O nN (Charam) ‘to shut 
 out,” ‘to consecrate” (hence /aram, a sa- 
 cred shrine). According to this derivation, 
 the Cherubim would be the guardians and 
 defenders of that which is consecrated, of the 
 Shrine or the Paradise. Canon Cook (see 
 Appendix to this volume) has traced the word 
 to an Egyptian root, which probably means 
 ‘‘carve,” or at any rate ‘‘shape.” In Matt. 
 XVill. 2, xepe@ is the Coptic for popdn. 
 
 Cain, and said, I have gotten a man 
 from the Lorp. | 
 
 2 And she again bare his brother 
 t Abel. 
 
 ground. 
 
 Jonathan ‘‘a man, the angel of the Lorp.” 
 
 Following the latter paraphrast, Luther, 
 Munster, Fagius, Schmidt, Pfeiffer, Baum- 
 gart. and others, have rendered ‘‘I have got- 
 ten a man, even JEHOVAH,” as though 
 Eve understood that the seed, who was to 
 bruise the serpent, should be incarnate Deity, 
 and supposed that Cain was that seed. We 
 can, however, scarcely see ground enough to 
 believe that Eve’s knowledge was so advanced, 
 or her faith in the Messiah so lively as to 
 
 om 
 i 
 
 3 And tin process of time it came 3-702" 
 
v4] GENESIS. IV. 53 
 to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit firstlings of his ‘flock and of the fat ents 
 of the ground an offering unto the thereof. And the Lorp had “re- goats, 
 
 Lorp. 
 4 And Abel, he also brought of the 
 
 have called forth such an exclamation, It is 
 more probable that the particle rendered in 
 our Version from is a preposition (it is in the 
 next chapter (v. 24) rendered with), and that 
 it signifies, as the LX X. has it, by means of, 
 or, as Gesenius, dy the help of. ‘There is, 
 however, little doubt that her words had 
 some pregnant meaning, and that she looked 
 on Cain as at all events one of that race 
 which was destined to triumph over the seed 
 of the Serpent. 
 
 “The use of the name (JEHOVAH) is 
 significant, though we cannot think that Eve 
 already knew this name of God, which was 
 first revealed to man ata later period of his 
 history, and which is of Hebrew origin, 
 whereas that language probably did not exist 
 until the time of the dispersion at Babel. 
 Yet, doubtless, the historian expresses the 
 true meaning of Eve’s speech which she spoke, 
 inspired by that help which had been gra- 
 ciously given her of God” (Keil, ‘ Bibl. Com- 
 ment.’). 
 
 2. Abel.) She called her first-born Cain 
 (possession), but this second Hebel (4reath, 
 vapour, vanity, nothingness), because all hu- 
 man possession is but vanity. Yet it is not 
 said, that Abel was so named by Eve herself, 
 as Cain had been. Hence it is possible, that 
 the name Abel was that by which he became 
 known, after his life had passed away like a 
 breath or a vapour. 
 
 Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was 
 a tiller of the ground| ‘The word ren- 
 dered sheep includes sheep and goats. It is 
 observed that the wildest nations live by 
 hunting, those, who have thrown off the first 
 barbarism, are nomadic, feeding sheep and 
 cattle, those more civilized are agriculturists 
 (see Rosen.). Hence the rationalist view co- 
 incides with the heathen, that a state of na- 
 ture was pure barbarism, and that man gra- 
 dually emerged from it into nomadic, then 
 into agricultural, and finally into civilized 
 life. In contradistinction to this, the account 
 of Genesis represents man as placed by his 
 Maker in a state of very simple civilization. 
 Adam in Paradise was “to dress and to keep” 
 the garden (Gen. ii. 15). His sons must 
 have learned from him the knowledge which 
 he had thus acquired. It is not likely to 
 have been extensive knowledge, probably the 
 very simplest possible, but still sufficient to 
 rescue them from a state of pure barbarism, 
 and from the necessity of living by the chase. 
 
 See note A at the end of this Chapter. 
 
 3. in process of time] Lit. ‘at the end of 
 days.” Abenezra understands ‘at the end of 
 
 spect unto Abel and to his offer- ,. 
 ing: 
 
 the year.” So Fagius, Bochart, Clericus, 
 Dathe, Rosenmiiller, and many others. Cle- 
 ricus quotes from Aristot. ‘Ethics,’ VIII. 2. 
 ‘It appears that ancient sacrifices were offer- 
 ed after the gathering of the fruits of the 
 earth, they being a kind of first fruits. More- 
 over, at that time, men were most at leisure.” 
 
 an offering| ‘The word here used always 
 signifies an unbloody oblation. It is frequently 
 translated ‘‘a meat offering.” Its nature is 
 defined, Lev. xi. 1 seq. 
 
 4. of the firstlings of his flock and of the 
 fat thereof| ‘There has been in all times a 
 difference of opinion as to the Divine or hu- 
 man origin of sacrifice. Sacrifices were so 
 thoroughly sanctioned by the Divine law in 
 after times, so generally accepted by God, 
 and made so conspicuously types of the Lamb 
 of God, that it is difficult to conceive how 
 they should have arisen but from a Divine 
 command. Yet, there is a deep silence as to 
 any such command, whilst the institution of 
 the Sabbath and of other positive ordinances 
 is distinctly recorded. Hence, many have 
 thought that sacrifice was dictated by an in- 
 stinct of natural religion, and then, by a con- 
 descension to man’s infirmity, sanctioned for 
 a temporary purpose, and constituted an 
 image of redemption. It is impossible to say 
 what the view of the Apostolic fathers was; 
 but from the time of Justin Martyr (‘ Apol.’ 
 I. 5; ‘Dial.’ pp. 237, 292), the fathers gen- 
 erally adopted the belief that sacrifice was a 
 human, not a Divine ordinance. A remark- 
 able exception to this appears in a passage of 
 the most learned of the 4th century divines 
 (Euseb. ‘Dem. Evang.’ I. 10), in which he 
 distinctly ascribes the origin of sacrifice to a 
 Divine inspiration, though even this does not 
 necessarily imply a Divine command. It 
 may be fairly said, that no certain conclu- 
 sion on this question can possibly be arrived 
 at, in the silence of Scripture. ‘The principal 
 arguments on the side of the Divine origin 
 may be seen in Bp. Jer. Taylor, ‘Duct. Dub.’ 
 Bk. 11. R. xii. §$ 27, 30; Witsii ‘ Agypt.’ 
 Ill. 14; Kennicott, ‘Two Dissertations,’ I. 
 p- 184 sq.; Magee ‘On Atonement,’ Disc. 1. 
 and notes; Faber, ‘Three Dispensations,’ Vol. I. 
 The arguments on the opposite side may be 
 found in Spencer, ‘De Legibus Heb.’ Lib. 11. 
 Diss. ii.; Warburton, ‘ Div. Legat.’ Bks. v1. 
 1x.; Davison’s ‘Remains,’ art. on origin of Sa- 
 crifice. ‘The work of Outram, ‘De Sacrificiis,’ 
 should by all means be consulted, which takes 
 an impartial survey of the whole question. 
 
 had respect unto] Comp. Num. xvi. 15; 
 
54 
 
 GENESIS. IV. ry eee 
 5 But unto Cain and to his offering 7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not ! or, 
 
 d Cai Ib d? and if thou d cet 
 he had not respect. An ain was e accepted? and if thou doest not excez. 
 very wroth, and his countenance well, sin lieth at the door. And ‘unto (32 
 fell. thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt svt 
 
 6 And the Lorp said unto Cain, rule over him. o Wisd. 10, 
 Why art thou wroth? and why is thy 8 And Cain talked with Abel his fate. 25 
 countenance fallen? brother: and it came to pass, when 3s: 
 
 z John 3. 
 12. Jude rr, 
 Amos v. 22. How did the Almighty express understand siz to mean the punishment of sin, 
 
 His approval of Abel’s offering? According 
 to the ancient Greek translation of ‘Theod., it 
 was by sending down fire to consume the sa- 
 crifice, as in Lev. ix. 24% Jud. vi. 21; 1 K. 
 Xvill. 38; 1 Chr. xxi. 26; 2 Chr. vii. x. -This 
 explanation has been adopted by St Jerome, 
 Rashi, Abenezra, Kimchi, Luther, Grotius, 
 Delitzsch, and many others, Nothing but 
 conjecture can guide us in this matter. We 
 must be content to suppose, that some sign, 
 intelligible to both the brothers, was given 
 from above. ‘The reason, as well as the 
 mode, of the acceptance of Abel’s gift has 
 been greatly debated. Ver. 7, and Heb. xi. 4, 
 seem to prove that the difference of spirit in 
 which the two offerings were made caused 
 the diversity of acceptance. ‘The Apostle 
 says, ‘‘ By faith Abel offered a more excellent 
 sacrifice.” Faith, therefore, was the motive 
 power; yet the result may have been that the 
 sacrifice so offered was a better, fuller, and 
 more acceptable sacrifice. Some have main- 
 tained that Cain brought fruits only, that 
 Abel brought both fruits and the firstlings of 
 his flock (see Kennicott, as above, p. 194). 
 The wording of the original does not seem to 
 warrant this. But, whilst we may see in the 
 different spirit and disposition of the offerers 
 a reason why one should be accepted and the 
 other rejected, still ‘‘the view so often ex- 
 pressed, that Abel’s bloody sacrifice resulted 
 from a more profound religious apprehension 
 than that of Cain, which was ‘ without shed- 
 ding of blood,’ seems to agree with the gene- 
 ral bearing of the text” (Kurtz, ‘Hist. of O. 
 C.’ Vol, I. p. 89); even if it be not admitted 
 that a Divine ordinance had already sanction- 
 ed animal sacrifices, 
 
 5. countenance fell] Cp. the original of 
 Nehem. vi. 16. 
 
 7. shalt thou not be accepted| Is there 
 not acceptance? Lit. “lifting up” either 
 of guilt (z.e. pardon), or of the countenance, as 
 when a suppliant bending down his face is 
 accepted, and so his face raised up and cheer= 
 ed. Or more probably as the A. V., Is there 
 not acceptance? Shalt thou not be accepted 
 by God? 
 
 if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the 
 door| ‘This is generally explained as mean- 
 ing that sin crouches at the door of the soul, 
 like a wild beast, ready to devour it. Others 
 
 in which sense the word is sometimes used, 
 see Zech. xiv. 19 (so Onk., Vatablus, Cornel. 
 a Lapide). Some again interpret “‘a sin offer- 
 ing” (another frequent sense of the Hebrew 
 word) which in the form of an animal victim 
 
 lies or crouches at your door (see Kennicott, 
 
 as above, p. 216, and Lee, ‘Lex.’ s. v. NNN). 
 The chief objection to this latter interpreta- 
 tion is that there is no instance of this use of 
 the word before the giving of the Law; which 
 Law appears to have brought out into clearer 
 relief the knowledge of sin and the need of 
 sin-offering. See Rom. iii. 20. 
 
 And unto thee shall be his desire, &c.] 
 There are two principal interpretations of 
 these words, which have divided commenta- 
 tors in all times, the one set referring Ais de- 
 sire to Abel, the other to sim. “The LOOX. 
 Version clearly refers it to Abel, which inter- 
 pretation is adopted by Chrysost., Ambrose, 
 Augustine, and most of the fathers, by Gro- 
 tius, Vossius, Heidegger, by our own trans- 
 lators, and by a majority of English commen- 
 tators. ‘The sense will then be, that Cain, 
 whose jealousy had been excited by God’s 
 acceptance of Abel, need not, if he behaved 
 well, fear that Abel should be preferred be- 
 fore him; his pre-eminence of birth should 
 still be preserved to him: the desire of the 
 younger brother should be towards him (an 
 idiomatic expression specially noting the long- 
 ing of one who looks up to another as an ob- 
 ject of reverence, and so noting dependence, 
 as of a younger brother on an elder, cp. Gen. 
 ili. 16). ‘The other interpretation, which is 
 apparently, though not certainly, favoured by 
 the Vulgate, is given in the Targums of Jeru- 
 salem and Pseudo- Jonathan, and adopted by 
 Rashi, and most Jewish writers, by Luther’s 
 translation, Munster, Pererius, Rosenmiiller, 
 Von Bohlen, Delitzsch, Knobel, Keil, and 
 most of the Germans. ‘The sense of the pas- 
 sage on this supposition would be, ‘Sin lieth 
 crouching like a wild beast at the door of the 
 soul; its desire is towards thee, yet thou 
 art not given over into its power; but if thou 
 wilt, thou shalt be able to keep it in subjec- 
 tion.” The former of these interpretations, 
 which is also the more ancient, seems both 
 more natural and more according with the 
 simple meaning of the original. 
 
 ' 8. Cain talked with Abel] ‘The original 
 
v. 9—14.| 
 
 they were in the field, that Cain rose 
 up against Abel his brother, and slew 
 him. 
 
 g § And the Lorp said unto Cain, 
 Where zs Abel thy brother? And he 
 
 said, I know not: 4m I my brother’s 
 
 Garo IN Beir 2ieV. 
 
 12 When thou tillest the ground, it 
 shali not henceforth yield unto thee 
 her strength; a fugitive and a vaga- 
 bond shalt thou be in the earth. 
 
 13 And Cain said unto the Lorn, 
 
 55 
 
 I My punishment zs greater than I can 1 or, azy 
 
 keeper? bear. teins 
 10 And he said, What hast thou 14 Behold, thou hast driven me ripen 
 Heb. done? the voice of thy brother’s tblood out this day from the face of the forgiven. 
 
 crieth unto me from the ground. 
 
 11 And now art thou cursed from 
 the earth, which hath opened her 
 mouth to receive thy brother’s blood 
 from thy hand ; 
 
 means more naturally ‘Cain said to Abel.” 
 Accordingly in some few of the Masoretic 
 MSS. there is the mark of an omission here. 
 The Samaritan Pentateuch, the LXX., Syr., 
 Vulg., read ‘‘ Cain said to Abel his brother, 
 Let us go into the field.” These latter words, 
 however, do not occur in the Greek Versions 
 of Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, or the 
 most ancient Targum, that of Onkelos. It is 
 probable that the words were inserted in the 
 Sam., LXX., &c. asa gloss, from the difficulty 
 of explaining the passage without them; and 
 that this is really an example of an ancient 
 and obsolete usage of the verb #o say, which 
 here means either to talk with, as the A. V., 
 or to tell, as Jerome, or to command, to lay a 
 command upon, according to Arabic usage, as 
 Prof. Lee. 
 
 10. the woice of thy brother's blood crieth 
 unto me| ‘The verb ‘‘crieth” here agrees 
 with ‘blood,” which is in the plural, in 
 which form it is used specially of blood shed, 
 drops of blood, above all of blood shed by 
 violence and murder. Murder is a crime 
 which cries to heaven for vengeance, and 
 though the blood may be hidden, its voice 
 cannot be silenced. 
 
 11. now art thou cursed from the earth| The 
 words are variously rendered (1) ‘‘ Cursed 
 art thou from the ground,” z.e. the curse shall 
 come upon thee from the earth, which shall 
 not yield thee her fruit (Abenezra, Kimchi, 
 Knobel). (2) ‘Cursed art thou away from 
 the land,” i.e. Thou art cursed and banished 
 from the land, in which thou hast dwelt, and 
 in which thy father and brethren are dwelling 
 (Rosenm., Vater, Tuch, Knobel). (3) ‘‘ Cursed 
 art thou even more than the earth” which 
 had been cursed (ch. iii, 17). Of these (3) 
 seems quite inadmissible; either of the others 
 yields a pertinent sense. The second is the 
 most probable. 
 
 12. When thou tillest, &c.] ‘The curse 
 
 was in effect, that Cain should be banished 
 from the land inhabited and cultivated by 
 
 earth; and from thy face shall I be 
 hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a 
 vagabond in the earth; and it shall 
 come to pass, that every one that 
 
 findeth me shall slay me. 
 
 Adam and his family, should wander about 
 without a settled habitation or a fertile dwell- 
 ing place, living hardly in a barren and inhos- 
 pitable wilderness. 
 
 13. My punishment] ‘There is great va- 
 riety of interpretation here. The Hebrews 
 constantly expressed sin and punishment for 
 sin by the same words; moreover to Jdear, 
 and to take away or forgive, were thoughts 
 closely connected. Hence (1) ‘“ My sin is 
 too great to be forgiven” (as in the Marg.) is 
 the rendering of LXX., Onk., Syr., Vulg., 
 Saad. Whilst (2) Abenezra, Kimchi, and 
 the majority of modern commentators, render 
 as the A. V., ‘‘My punishment is greater 
 than I can bear.” Both these renderings 
 can be defended on good grounds by Hebrew 
 usage. The latter seems more accordant with 
 the temper of Cain’s mind, and is probably 
 correct. 
 
 14. from thy face shall I be hid| ‘Though 
 God no longer constantly manifested His 
 presence as in Eden, yet there were at times 
 some indications of that presence, (e.g. see v. 
 4). It may perhaps be inferred that some 
 special place had already been set apart for 
 Divine worship and sacred service. (On this 
 subject see Blunt, ‘Undesigned Coincidences,’ 
 I. p. 9, eighth Edition, 1863). 
 
 every one that jfindeth me shall slay me] 
 Josephus, Kimchi, Michaelis, and others, 
 have supposed that Cain feared death from 
 the beasts of the field; but most commenta- 
 tors rightly understand that his fear was from 
 the vengeance of his own kindred. It is ob- 
 served by Kurtz that, according to hints ga- 
 thered from Gen. iv. 25, the murder of Abel 
 probably took place just before the birth of 
 Seth, i.e. 130 years after the creation of man, 
 Gen. v. 3. We need not suppose that Cain, 
 Abel, and Seth, were the only sons of Adam. 
 Indeed, from Gen. v. 4, we infer that there 
 were others. Cain, Abel, and Seth, are men- 
 tioned for obvious reasons; Abel for his piety 
 and his early death, Cain for his wickedness 
 
56 
 
 t Heb. 
 
 GENESUS! LY 
 
 15 And the Lorp said unto him, 
 Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, 
 vengeance shall be taken on him seven- 
 fold. And the Lorp set a mark upon 
 Cain, lest any finding him should kill 
 him. 
 
 16 7 And Cain went out from the 
 presence of the Lorp, and dwelt in 
 the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. 
 
 17 And Cain knew his wife; and 
 
 Chanock. she conceived, and bare Enoch: and 
 
 and the worldly wisdom of his posterity, Seth 
 because he was the ancestor of the promised 
 seed. ‘There may then, in 130 years, have 
 grown up a very considerable number of chil- 
 dren and grandchildren to Adam and Eve. 
 An Eastern tradition assigns to them no less 
 than 33 sons and 27 daughters. 
 
 15. Therefore} The LXX., Symm., 
 Theodot., Vulg., Syr., read Not so. So 
 Dathe and others. 
 
 whosoever slayeth| Cain, though guilty 
 of a terrible sin, may not have had the full 
 and fixed purpose to commit murder, but in 
 a moment of furious anger have seized a 
 weapon and dealt a murderous blow, perhaps 
 hardly aware of its deadly consequences. 
 Hence, it may be, the Most High forbids him 
 to be put to death, but sentences him to a 
 perpetual banishment from his early home, 
 and to a life of misery and sorrow. Kalisch 
 well observes, ‘‘’The early death of Abel can 
 be no punishment; he seemed in fact to enjoy 
 the peculiar favour of God; his offering was 
 graciously accepted. We find, therefore, in 
 this narrative the great and beautiful thought, 
 that life is not the highest boon; that the 
 pious find a better existence and a more bless- 
 ed reward in another and a purer sphere; but 
 that crime and guilt are the greatest evils; 
 that they are punished by a long and weari- 
 some life, full of fear and care and compunc- 
 tion of conscience.” 
 
 set a mark upon Cain| Gave a sign to 
 Cain. LXX. The interpretation that God 
 provided Cain with some mark which would 
 make him known is adopted by Pseudo- Jona- 
 than, most of the Jewish Commentators, 
 Luther, Calvin, Piscator, Wogal, &c. Most 
 modern commentators agree that God gave 
 some sign to Cain to assure him that he 
 should not be slain, (Abenezra, Gabe, Dathe, 
 Rosenm., Gesen., Maurer, Hitzig, V. Bohl., 
 Tuch, Baumg., Kalisch, Delitzsch). Of 
 what nature the sign may have been, we have 
 now no means of learning. 
 
 16. the presence of the Lord] It is ques- 
 tioned whether this means merely from con- 
 versing with the Lord, or whether Eden, 
 
 [v. 15—19. 
 
 he builded a city, and called the name 
 of the city, after the name of his son, 
 Enoch. 
 
 18 And unto Enoch was born Irad: 
 and Irad begat Mehujael: and Me- 
 hujael begat Methusael: and Me- 
 thusael begat 'Lamech. 
 
 19 1 And Lamech took unto him 
 
 two wives: the name of the one was 
 Adah, and the name of the other Zil- 
 lah. 
 
 though not the garden of Eden, in which 
 Adam had dwelt since the fall, was esteemed 
 a sacred spot, a spot in which still a peculiar 
 presence of God was looked for by man. See 
 on v. 14. 
 
 Nod] i.e. ** wandering.” It is impossible 
 to say where Nod was situated, except that 
 it lay east of Eden. 
 
 17. Enoch] It has been contended that 
 in these genealogies Adam=Enosh, Enoch 
 or Chanoch = Enoch, Cain = Kenan, Irad = 
 Jered, Mehujael = Mahalaleel, Methusael = 
 Methuselah. Inthe first place, however, there 
 is a manifest difference in the roots of the 
 names so identified; next, the paucity of 
 names at this early period may have natu- 
 rally led to similar names being adopted 
 in different families; 3rdly, the relationship 
 of the families of Seth and Cain, and the pro- 
 bably occasional intercourse between them, 
 would not unnaturally tend to the same 
 result. Dettinger is quoted by Kurtz (Vol. 
 I. p. 91), as having called attention to the 
 fact, that the text furnishes more detailed 
 particulars about Enoch and Lamech, whose 
 names were so similar to Sethite names, in 
 order to prevent the possibility of their being 
 confounded, and to shew more clearly that 
 the direction in which these two lines tended 
 was markedly opposite. See Kurtz as above, 
 Havernick, ‘Introd. to Pentateuch,’ p. 109. 
 
 builded a city| Rather “began to build a 
 city,” lit. “‘ was building a city.” It is not 
 necessary to suppose that the city was built 
 immediately on the birth of Enoch. It may 
 have been built when Cain had lived many 
 years and was surrounded by children and 
 grandchildren. ‘The word city is, of course, 
 not to be interpreted by modern ideas: a 
 village of rude huts, which was distinguished 
 from the booths or tents of the nomads, 
 would satisfy all the conditions of the text. 
 
 19. Lamech took unto him two wives| Here 
 we have the first example of polygamy ; which, 
 though afterwards tolerated, had its rise 
 among the sons of Cain, and is evidently men- 
 tioned for reprobation. 
 
 t Heb. 
 Lemech 
 
Heb. 
 vhetter. 
 
 v. 20—23.| 
 
 20 And Adah bare Jabal: he was 
 the father of such as dwell in tents, 
 and of such as have cattle. 
 
 21 And his brother’s name was 
 Jubal: he was the father of all such 
 as handle the harp and organ. 
 
 22 And Zillah, she also bare Tu- 
 
 bal-cain, an 'instructer of every arti- 
 
 GENESESF tv. 
 
 ficer in brass and iron: and the sister 
 of Tubal-cain was Naamah. 
 23 And Lamechsaid unto his wives, 
 
 wives of Lamech, hearken unto my sea 
 speech: for 'I have slain a man to plete? 
 my wounding, and a young man Ito &. 
 my hurt. ote 
 
 20. the father of such as dwell in tents, 
 and...bave cattle] Jabal invented tents and 
 introduced the custom of pasturing cattle 
 round the tents, and perhaps even of stalling 
 them in tents. Moreover, the word here 
 used for cattle implies larger cattle, whereas 
 that used of Abel v. 2 applied only to smaller 
 cattle: Jabal therefore was the first who in- 
 troduced the thorough nomadic life. (See 
 Bochart, ‘ Hieroz.’ P. 1. Lib. I. c. 44.) 
 
 21. the harp and the organ] ‘The kinnur, 
 which descended to the Greeks and was by 
 them called Kinura, is described by Josephus 
 as having ten strings and as played on by a 
 plectrum; but in 1 Sam. xvi. 23, Xvill. Io, 
 xix. 9, David is said to have played on it 
 with his hand. It was probably, when in- 
 vented by Jubal, the simplest form of stringed 
 instrument. ‘The word rendered organ was 
 apparently a pipe, bagpipe, panpipe, or some 
 very simple wind instrument: Onkelos renders 
 it by pipe or flute. ‘It is not an accidental 
 fact, that the lyre and the flute were intro~ 
 duced by the brothers of a nomadic herds- 
 man. It isin the happy leisure of this occu- 
 pation that music is generally first exercised 
 and appreciated.” Kalisch, 
 
 22. an instructer of every artificer in 
 brass and iron| So Onkelos. Perhaps (with 
 LXX. and Vulg.) a sharpener of every instru- 
 ment in bronze and iron. ‘The word rendered 
 brass is certainly either bronze, or, more proba~ 
 bly, a native metal, copper (see Smith’s ‘ Dict. of 
 the Bible, art. Brass). Bronze is an alloy of 
 copper and tin, very much harder than either 
 of them and also than brass, with a little more 
 tin it becomes bell-metal. Previously to this 
 time all weapons for defence or instruments of 
 husbandry may have been of flint, or wood, 
 or bone. Uncivilized nations at the present 
 time have weapons made of flint, wood, bone, 
 shark’s teeth, &c. Where nations have lost 
 the usages of more civilized life, they seem to 
 have fallen back on a flint age, then to have 
 invented bronze weapons (in the case of South 
 America weapons of gold), and lastly to have 
 discovered the use of iron. Tubal Cain is 
 here described as the first who made metal 
 instruments and sharpened them. It is not to 
 be objected, that this was too early for the 
 invention of metals. If Tubal Cain was con- 
 temporary with Enoch (the descendant of 
 Seth in the same degree) he must have been 
 
 born at least 500 years after the creation of 
 Adam, according to the Hebrew Chronology, 
 or I000 years according to the LX X. Chrono- 
 logy. Whether we must understand that 
 he invented the use of both copper and iron, 
 or only of copper or bronze, which led in 
 course of time to the farther invention of 
 iron, it may be difficult to decide from the 
 concise and obscure wording of the text. 
 That the most ancient inhabitants of Europe 
 were ignorant of the use of metal, as indi- 
 cated by the discovery of flint weapons in the 
 gravel, can be no proof that they were un- 
 known to the early descendants of Adam. 
 If the colonists of Australia were for the 
 next thousand years to be separated from all 
 connection with the rest of the world, it is 
 quite possible, notwithstanding their present 
 high state of civilization, that they might 
 utterly lose many of the arts of civilized life, 
 and perhaps, if there were a deficiency of coal, 
 or lime, or native metals, even the use of me- 
 tallic instruments. 
 
 Nothing can be more natural or probable 
 than the difference of character and develop- 
 ment in the descendants of Cain and Seth 
 respectively. In the former we see the chil- 
 dren of this world wise in their generation, 
 rapidly advancing in art and the acquire- 
 ment of riches, but sensual, violent and god- 
 less. In the latter we find less of social and 
 political advancement, but a life more regu- 
 lated by the dictates of conscience and by 
 faith in the Providence and Grace of God. 
 
 Resemblances to the names of Lamech’s’ 
 
 family have been traced in the names of those 
 to whom the Latins attributed similar inven- 
 tions. ‘Thus Tubal Cain has been thought 
 =Vulcan, Naamah, “the lovely, or beauti- 
 ful,” may then = Venus, Jubal, the inventor of 
 the lyre = Apollo. It is observed also that 
 the refinement and perhaps the luxury of the 
 descendants of Cain appear in the names of 
 their wives and daughters, Naamah, lovely, 
 Adah, beauty or ornament, Zillah, shadow. 
 
 23, 24. And Lamech said, &c.] 
 
 And Lamech said unto his wives, 
 
 Adah and Zillah, hear my voice, 
 
 Ye wives of Lamech, give ear unto my speech, 
 For I slay a man if he woundeth me, 
 
 Even a young man, if he hurteth me, 
 
 Lo! Cain would be avenged seven-fold, 
 
 But Lamech seventy-and-seven fold. 
 
 57 
 
58 GENESIS. IV. [v. 24—26. 
 24 If Cain shall be avenged seven- hath appointed me another seed in- 
 fold, truly Lamech seventy and seven- stead of Abel, whom Cain slew. t Heb. 
 fold. 26 And to Seth, to him also there ((2%_,, 
 25 § And Adam knew his wife was born a son; and he called his themselves 
 again; and she bare a son, and called name 'Enos: then began men !to eae 
 te. =~ his name tSeth: For God, said she, call upon the name of the Lorp. Gann 
 
 The speech of Lamech has exercised the 
 skill of translators and interpreters of all 
 times. Its obscure and enigmatical character 
 is admitted as a mark of its remote antiquity 
 even by the most unfavourable critics. The 
 apparent meaning of the words is this. Amid 
 the violence of the times, especially among 
 the descendants of Cain, Lamech comforts 
 his wives with the assurance that with the aid 
 of the bronze and iron instruments now in 
 his hands, he could kill any one who injured 
 him (‘I slay or would slay a man for 
 wounding me”); and that, if it had been 
 promised to Cain, that he should be avenged 
 seven fold, there was power in the hands of 
 Lamech’s family to avenge seventy-seven fold. 
 The speech is one of confident boasting. La- 
 mech trusts in his weapons of brass and steel 
 to maintain his cause, even when referring to 
 words used by God to his forefather Cain. 
 
 The chief difficulty lies in the use of the 
 perfect tense in the verb s/ay: lit. “I have 
 slain,” (which is the rendering of the LXX. 
 Vulg., Syr., &c.). That difficulty seems to 
 have suggested the supposition that a zot may 
 have fallen out (which is the rendering of 
 Onkelos, ‘I have not slain,”) or that it should 
 be rendered interrogatively (‘‘ Have I slain?”): 
 but the more probable explanation is, that in 
 this ancient distich the perfect tense is used to 
 express the arrogant confidence of the boast- 
 er; even as at times the perfect is adopted in 
 the most sure word of prophecy, the future 
 being represented as having all the certainty 
 of the past. The words rendered in the 
 A.V. ‘to my wounding ”—‘‘ to my hurt ”— 
 probably mean ‘ for my wounding,” &c. i.e. 
 ‘for wounding me,” or ‘in revenge for his 
 wounding me.” 
 
 25. Seth] z.e. ** Foundation,” from the 
 word signifying to place, rendered here ‘ap- 
 pointed.” Seth came into the place of Abel, 
 
 NOTE A. ADDITIONAL NOTE ON CHAP. IV. v. 2. 
 
 as the ancestor of the Theocratic race and of 
 the promised seed. 
 
 26. then began men to call upon the name of 
 the Lord| Then began he to call on the 
 name ofthe LORD. There is great diversity 
 in the interpretation of these words. The Sa- 
 maritan Pentateuch and the Vulgate refer them 
 to Enos, ‘‘’‘Then he, z.e. Enos, began to call 
 on the name of the Lorp.” ‘The LXX. has 
 ‘“'Then he hoped,” &c. it being possible to 
 refer the verb to a root signifying ‘‘ to hope,” 
 whence some have understood, that the birth 
 of Enos inspired a new hope that the promise 
 to Eve should be fulfilled. ‘The Targum of 
 the Pseudo- Jonathan has ‘‘ In those days men 
 began to make themselves idols, which they 
 called after the name of the Word of the 
 Lorp.” This interpretation is adopted by 
 some celebrated Jewish commentators (Kim- 
 chi, Rashi, &c.), who derive the verb from 
 a root signifying ‘to profane,” and render 
 ‘Then was there profanation in calling on 
 the name of the Lorp.” Jerome (‘Quest.’) 
 mentions this as the opinion of many Jews in 
 his days. ‘The most natural sense of the 
 Hebrew is, that when Enos was born, Seth 
 his father in gratitude and hope then began 
 to praise the Lorp and to call on Him with 
 reassured hope in His mercy and His pro- 
 mises. ‘There is nothing to connect the verb 
 with Enos as its nominative case rather than 
 with Seth; nor again is there any good 
 ground for the notion that emphasis is to be 
 placed on the special name of God, JEHOVAH; 
 as though then for the first time He was 
 invoked under that name. ‘The sacred narra- 
 tive has all along used the name JEHOVAH; 
 and whether we believe it to have been known 
 from earlier times or to have been revealed 
 first to Moses, there is nothing whatever to 
 connect its revelation and acknowledgment 
 with the birth of Enos, 
 
 On THE EARLY CIVILIZA- 
 
 TION OF MANKIND. 
 
 HAVERNICK (‘Introd. to the Pentateuch,’ 
 Translation, p. 104) has shewn that the tra 
 ditions of ancient nations, the Phcenicians, 
 Egyptians, Greeks, &c. refer the invention 
 of agriculture to the earliest mythic ages; 
 and that the investigators of history, Her- 
 der, Link, Schlosser, &c. have been led to 
 the conclusion that “the discovery of the 
 breeding of cattle, of agriculture, and of the 
 
 preparation of metals, belong to prehistoric 
 times, and that in the historic period these 
 arts have made comparatively no great ad- 
 vances.” ‘The recent discoveries of human 
 remains, and of the implements of human in- 
 dustry in the gravel and drift formations on 
 the Earth’s surface, may seem to contradict 
 all this. Ethnologists distinguish a flint age, 
 a bronze age, and an iron age, as having ex- 
 
Chron. 
 3 
 
 Wael, 2: 
 
 isted in ancient Europe; during the first of 
 which only flint instruments, during the se- 
 cond bronze, during the third, iron instru- 
 ments appear to have been in use. And, as 
 for the most part in the earlier periods, ‘the 
 skulls seem to have been smaller and of a 
 lower type than those of later date, the theory 
 of early barbarism and of progressive civiliza- 
 tion has been thought to derive confirmation 
 from Geology. Sir Charles Lyell says also, 
 that ‘had the original stock of mankind been 
 really endowed with superior intellectual 
 power and with inspired knowledge, and 
 had possessed the same improvable nature as 
 their posterity, the point of advancement, 
 which they would have realized ere this, 
 would have been immeasurably higher” (‘ An-= 
 tiquity of Man,’ p. 378). He goes on to say 
 that, instead of rude pottery and flint wea- 
 pons, we should in that case have found works 
 like those of Phidias and Praxiteles, It may 
 be answered, that Scripture does not repre- 
 sent the first man as ‘‘ endowed with superior 
 intellectual power and with inspired know- 
 ledge.” All that we learn is, that Adam 
 was placed in Eden to till it, that his power 
 of speech was exercised by having to name 
 the brute creation, that he had a simple com- 
 mand given him, and afterwards a special 
 promise. Morally he may have been, in the 
 first instance, in a state of innocence, without 
 being intellectually in a condition of emi- 
 nence. As for the advance of knowledge, 
 
 many nations have been in a state of mental 
 cultivation and of art knowledge incompa- 
 rably beyond that of Adam and his children, 
 
 and yet have remained for centuries upon 
 centuries without any apparent progress; for 
 instance, the people of China. All that we 
 say is, that his primary state was not.a state 
 of savageness, but rather of rudimentary civi- 
 lization. And this is really not opposed, but 
 confirmed, by the records of Geology. ‘‘ We 
 must remember, that as yet we have no dis- 
 tinct geological evidence, that the appearance 
 of what are called the inferior races of man- 
 kind has always preceded in chronological or- 
 der that of the higher races” (Lyell, as above, 
 
 p- 90). On the contrary, some of the most 
 ancient remains of man and man’s art give 
 indications of considerable civilization. In 
 the valley of the Ohio there are hundreds of 
 mounds, which have served for temples, for 
 
 erie LER Vv. 
 
 1 The genealogy, age, and death of the patriarchs 
 Jrom Adam unto Noah. 24 Lhe godliness 
 and translation of Enoch. 
 
 HIS is the “book of the genera- 
 tions of Adam. In the day that 
 
 GE NESSEaV, 
 
 places of defence and of sepulture, containing 
 pottery, ornamental sculpture, articles in sil- 
 ver and copper, and stone weapons, with 
 skulls of the Mexican type. Above these 
 have grown a succession of forests, in which 
 the Red Indians for centuries may have 
 housed and hunted (Lyell, pp. 39, 40). 
 
 They prove that in those very ancient days 
 there must have been a civilization, of which 
 all traces have vanished above the surface of 
 the earth. As regards the fossil skulls found 
 in Europe, that known as ‘the Neanderthal 
 Skull” is of the lowest type, and is said to be 
 the most apelike skull ever seen, though its 
 capacity, 75 cubic inches, is greater than that 
 of some individuals of existing races. It was 
 discovered in a cavern with the thigh of a 
 bear: but there is nothing to prove its great 
 antiquity. It may be very ancient, but may 
 be comparatively modern. But the skull 
 found at Engis near Liege, which appears to 
 have been contemporary with the Mammoth, 
 and is assigned by Lyell to the post-pliocene 
 age, although the forehead is somewhat nar- 
 row, may be matched by the skulls of indi- 
 viduals of European race (Lyell, p. 80): and 
 the skull of the fossil man of Denise, though 
 said to be contemporary with the Mammoth 
 and coeval with the last eruption of the Puy 
 Volcanoes, and therefore as old as, or older 
 than, any other human skull yet discovered, 
 is of the ordinary Caucasian or European 
 type (Lyell, p. 200). No prudent Geologist 
 will admit, concerning any of these crania, 
 
 more than. that they bear marks of rude as 
 compared with civilized races, rather more 
 mastication, more prominent marks of mus- 
 cular attachment and the like, all things ot 
 every day occurrence. So, in fact, the argu- 
 ment from Geology is really coincident with 
 the testimony of Scripture and of universal 
 primitive tradition, viz. that man, in his ori- 
 ginal condition, was not a helpless savage, but 
 had at least the rudiments of civilization and 
 intelligence. 
 
 When we read that Cain was a tiller of the 
 ground, we do not necessarily conclude, that 
 he cultivated wheat and barley; he may have 
 known only of fruits, vegetables, roots, &c. 
 Yet it is observable, that cereals have been 
 discovered with some of the very early re- 
 mains of human industry. 
 
 God created man, in the likeness of 
 God made he him; 
 
 2 ®Male and female created he » wisd. 2. 
 and blessed them, and called *> 
 
 them ; 
 their name Adam, in the day when 
 they were created. 
 
 CuHaP. V. 1. the book of the generations 
 The record or recounting of the genealogica 
 
 history of Adam and his descendants. See 
 
 ch, ii. 4. 
 
 59 
 
60 GENESIS. V. [v. 320. 
 3 § And Adam lived an hundred 12 ™ And Cainan lived seventy 
 and thirty years, and begat @ son in years, and begat 'Mahalaleel: 
 his own likeness, after his image; and 13 And Cainan lived after he be- 
 called his name Seth: gat Mahalaleel eight hundred and 
 cr Chron. 4 ©And the days of Adam after he forty years, and begat sons and 
 »™&& had begotten Seth were eight hundred daughters: 
 years: and he begat sons and daughters : 14 And all the days of Cainan were 
 5 And all the days that Adam lived nine hundred and ten years: and he 
 were nine hundred and thirty years: died. 
 and he died. 15 § And Mahalaleel lived sixty 
 6 And Seth lived an hundred and and five years, and begat ' Jared: b 
 tHeb. five years, and begat 'Enos: 16 And Mahalaleel lived after he 7” 
 cn 7 And Seth lived after he begat begat Jared eight hundred and thirty 
 Enos eight hundred and seven years, years, and begat sons and daughters: 
 and begat sons and daughters: 17 And all the days of Mahalaleel 
 8 And all the days of Seth were were eight hundred ninety and five 
 nine hundred and twelve years: and years: and he died. 
 he died. 18 4 And Jared lived an hundred 
 g { And Enos lived ninety years, sixty and two years, and he begat 
 tHeb. and begat *Cainan: Enoch. 
 
 Cenait. 
 
 ro And Enos lived after he begat 
 Cainan eight hundred and fifteen 
 years, and begat sons and daughters: 
 11 And all the days of Enos were 
 nine hundred and five years: and he 
 
 died. 
 
 19 And Jared lived after he begat 
 Enoch eight hundred years, and begat 
 sons and daughters: 
 
 20 And all the days of Jared were 
 nine hundred sixty and two years: 
 
 and he died. 
 
 genealogy was ‘‘a memorial witnessing both 
 the truth of God’s promises and also the faith 
 and patience of the fathers.” The chronology 
 of this chapter is very different in the Hebrew, 
 the Samaritan and the Septuagint, as will be 
 seen in the following table of the generations 
 from Adam to the flood (see also note 
 
 3. Adam lived, &c.] The genealogy given 
 is that of the Sethites, probably as the line 
 of the promised seed. ‘The genealogy of the 
 Cainites was given much more imperfectly in 
 the last chapter, and with no dates or chro- 
 nological marks, because, says Keil, being 
 under the curse of God, they had no future. 
 
 He quotes Baumgarten as saying, that this 
 
 infra). 
 
 Samaritan Text. | 
 
 Hebrew Text. Septuagint. 
 Years Years Years 
 before | Rest | Whole | before | Rest | Whole] before | Rest | Whole 
 birth of | of Life. | Life. Life. Life. 
 
 is a of | of Life. birth of | of Life. | 
 Son. 
 
 Adam : 
 
 Seth 105 | 807 | 912 tog | 807.4 o1r2 205 | 707 | 912 
 Enosh go | 815 | 905 go | 815 | 905 190 | 7I5 | gos 
 Cainan 70 | 840 | QIo 70 | 840 | gio 170 | 740 | gio 
 Mahalaleel 65 | 830 | 895 65 | 830 | 895 165 | 730 | 895 
 Jared 162 | 800 | 962 62 | 785 847 162 | 800 | 962 
 Enoch 65 | 300 | 365 65 | 300 | 365 165 | 200 | 365 
 Methuselah 187 | 782 | 969 67 | 653 | 720 187 | 782 | 969 
 Lamech 182 4 SoS |. 977 53 | 600 | 653 188 | 565 | 753 
 Noah 00 500 500 
 
 Shem at the Flood 100 100 100 
 
 Date of Flood 1656 1307 2262 
 
 6. Enos] i.e. man. Adam signifies man, 
 
 mankind, generally. Enos, or Enosh, is rather 
 
 mortal, miserable man. 
 
 The now growing 
 
 experience of human sorrow and fragility 
 may have suggested this name. 
 
 9. Cainan] i.e. possession. 
 
 12. Mabhalaleel] ‘The Praise of God. 
 
 15. Jared] ‘The root of this name sig- 
 nifies to descend, Descent. 
 
 18. Enoch] i. e. consecrated. 
 
Vv. 2I—32.| 
 
 21 4 And Enoch lived sixty and 
 five years, and begat Methuselah: 
 
 22 And Enoch walked with God 
 after he begat Methuselah three hun- 
 dred years, and begat sons and daugh- 
 ters: 
 
 23 And all the days of Enoch were 
 three hundred sixty and five years: 
 
 Feu. 24 And Enoch walked with 
 ti°.,.5, God: and he was not; for God took 
 him. 
 25 And Methuselah lived an hun- 
 | dred eighty and seven years, and begat 
 Heb. tLamech: 
 
 entech. 
 
 26 And Methuselah lived after he 
 begat Lamech seven hundred eighty 
 and two years, and begat sons and 
 
 daughters: 
 27 And all the days of Methuselah 
 
 GE NES ESOP. 
 
 were nine hundred sixty and nine 
 years: and he died. 
 
 28 @ And Lamech lived an. hun- 
 dred eighty and two years, and begat 
 a son: 
 
 29 And he called his name Noah, 
 saying, This same shall comfort us 
 concerning our work and toil of our 
 hands, because of the ground which 
 the Lorp hath cursed. 
 
 30 And Lamech lived after he be- 
 gat Noah five hundred ninety and five 
 years, and begat sons and daughters: 
 
 31 And all the days of Lamech 
 were seven hundred seventy and seven 
 years: and he died. 
 
 32 And Noah was five hundred 
 years old: and Noah begat Shem, 
 Ham, and Japheth. 
 
 21. Methuselab| Perhaps “the missive of 
 death.” Bochart interprets ‘“‘ His death the 
 sending forth,” as indicating that his death 
 was contemporary with the pouring forth of 
 the waters, for Methuselah must have died 
 in the very year of the flood. Gesenius gives 
 the sense of the word as vir feli, ‘the man 
 of the sword” or ‘of the dart.” From its 
 frequent occurrence in Phcenician inscriptions, 
 &c., there can be little doubt that Methu= 
 Betha = man. 
 
 24. he was not; for God took him] The 
 LXX. rendering seems to interpret this of 
 translation. So do all the Targums. In 
 Ecclus. xliv. 16, we read ‘‘ He pleased the 
 Lord and was translated (into Paradise, ac- 
 cording to the Vulgate), being a pattern of 
 repentance.” ‘The words are, no doubt, ob- 
 scure. Yet, when we remember how uni- 
 
 versally the promise of the Old Testament is - 
 
 of life and blessing in this world, not of an 
 early and happy death, we could scarcely 
 doubt that the ancient interpretation was the 
 true one, even if it had not been that given 
 in Heb. xi. 5. ‘The history of Enoch is rea- 
 sonably supposed to be the origin of the 
 Phrygian tradition concerning a certain An- 
 nacus or Nannacus, who lived upwards of 
 300 years, concerning whom it was prophe- 
 sied that after him all would be destroyed. 
 
 This caused great grief among the Phrygians, 
 whence ‘to weep as in the days of Annacus” 
 became a proverb. At his death came the 
 deluge of Deucalion, and all men were de- 
 stroyed (Suidas, v. Navvaxos, Steph, Byz. v. 
 *Ikoviov). 
 
 29. he called his name Noah, saying, This 
 same shall comfort us, &c.| ‘The name ‘‘ Noah” 
 signifies ‘‘ Rest,” and the connection between 
 the thought of rest and that of comfort is 
 obvious. Lamech appears as one oppressed 
 with the toil and labour needful to subdue 
 the earth, and with the feeling that God had 
 cursed it and made it sterile. He expresses a 
 hope, that Noah would be a comfort to his 
 parents and the bringer of rest ; whether the 
 mere natural hope of a father that his son 
 should be a support and comfort to him, or 
 a hope looking to the promise made of old 
 to Eve, or a hope inspired by prophetic vision 
 that Noah should become the second founder 
 of a race, the head of a regenerated world, 
 it may be hard to say. ‘There may have 
 been an unconscious prophecy in the expres- 
 sion of a merely pious hope. 
 
 Which the LORD hath cursed| ‘This oc- 
 curs in a chapter which modern critics call 
 Elohistic. ‘Therefore they consider this an in- 
 terpolation. The truer inference would be that 
 the Elohistic theory is unfounded. 
 
 NOTE A. ON THE CHRONOLOGY IN CH. V. 
 
 Difficulties in the Chronology. 
 
 THE genealogies in this chapter and in 
 chapter xi. are the only sources extant for 
 the construction of a chronology of the patri- 
 archal ages. ‘The questions which arise are 
 of the same kind in both genealogies, and 
 
 1 Difference of texts. 
 3 Antiquity of human race, as deduced (1) from Geology, 
 (3) from Language, (4) from Ethnology. 
 
 2 Longevity of Patriarchs. 
 (2) from History, 
 
 may be considered together. ‘The difficulties 
 which suggest themselves may be arranged as 
 follows : 
 
 1. The disagreement between the Hebrew, 
 Samaritan and Septuagint texts. 
 
 1Gr. Noe. 
 
62 
 
 GE NESISI Ws 
 
 2. ‘The extreme longevity assigned to the 
 patriarchs, 
 
 3. The insufficient time allowed for the 
 existence of man upon the earth. 
 
 1. The first of these difficulties is such 
 as to render it impossible to arrive at a 
 certain conclusion as to the exact dates of 
 the creation of man, the Deluge and the call 
 of Abraham; but it in no degree affects the 
 veracity of the Sacred Record. It is true, 
 that there appears something like design in 
 the alterations which must have taken place ; 
 thus the Hebrew gives the age of Adam 
 as 130 + 800 = 930, whilst the LXX. give 
 230+ 700=930, and so on in the case of most 
 of the Patriarchs, the results being frequently 
 made to tally, whilst the constituents of these 
 results disagree. Hence, whilst some have 
 charged the Alexandrian translators with 
 lengthening the periods, in order more nearly 
 to satisfy the demands of Egyptian chrono- 
 logy, others have supposed that the rabbins 
 shortened the time, to escape the force of the 
 Christian’s argument, that the world was 
 six thousand years old, and that therefore 
 the Messiah must have come. If either of 
 these charges be true, it only brings us in 
 face of what is already familiar to all critics, 
 viz. that the errors of copyists were some- 
 times intentional, but that even these do not 
 affect the general integrity of the text. It is 
 well known that there have been some few 
 designed corruptions in the text of the New 
 Testament. It need not surprise us there- 
 fore, if we find reason to think that there 
 were some attempts of a like kind in the text 
 of the Old Testament. If anywhere the 
 temptation to correct existed, it could never 
 be stronger than in the genealogical tables of 
 the ancestors of the Jewish race. Indeed, as 
 numbers are of all things the most liable to 
 become confused in ancient documents, very 
 great errors in restoring them may be con- 
 sistent with the most honest intention on the 
 part of the restorers. And, though we be- 
 lieve in the Divine guidance and inspiration 
 of the original writer, we have no right to 
 expect that a miraculous power should have 
 so watched over the transmission of the re- 
 cords, as to have preserved them from all pos- 
 sible errors of transcription, though a special 
 Providence may have guarded them from such 
 loss or mutilation, as would have weakened 
 their testimony to Divine and spiritual truth. 
 
 2. As to the extreme longevity of the 
 Patriarchs, it is observable that some eminent 
 physiologists have thought this not impos- 
 sible; and even Buffon, by no means inclined 
 to credulity on the side of Scripture, ad- 
 mitted the truth of the record, and could see 
 physical causes for such long life in early 
 times. (See ‘Aids to Faith,’ p. 278.) It is 
 undoubted, that the traditions of ancient 
 nations, as Greeks, Babylonians, Egyptians, 
 Hindvos, and others, point to the great 
 longevity of the early inhabitants of the 
 
 globe; and though sceptics argue that this 
 only places the Scriptural account on a level 
 with other mythic histories (see Von Bohlen, 
 Vol. II. p. 100), yet we may reply that, if 
 the Scripture account were true, the tradi- 
 tions of other nations would be almost sure 
 to preserve some traces of the truth, and that 
 this is a more probable explanation of the 
 fact, than the supposition that all these na- 
 tions, however unconnected with each other, 
 should have stumbled upon the same fabulous 
 histories. 
 
 It is well observed by Delitzsch; ‘‘ We 
 must consider that all the old-world popu- 
 lation was descended from a nature originally 
 immortal (in Adam and Eve), that the cli- 
 mate, weather, and other natural conditions 
 were very different from those which suc- 
 ceeded, that the life was very simple and 
 even in its course, and that the after-working 
 of the Paradisiacal state was not at once lost 
 in the track of antiquity.” ‘To this Keil adds, 
 that this long life must have been very fa- 
 vourable to the multiplication of mankind, 
 for the formation of marked characters, and 
 the developement of the good and evil quali- 
 ties of different races. Family affection, piety, 
 good discipline and morality would strike 
 their roots deeper in pious families; whilst 
 evil propensities would be more and more 
 developed in godless races. Supposing, how- 
 ever, that physiology should ultimately decide 
 that the extreme longevity of the patriarchs 
 was not possible, without a continued mira- 
 cle, we should only be driven to the principle 
 already conceded, that numbers and dates, 
 especially in genealogical tables, are liable in 
 the course of transcription to become ob- 
 scured and exaggerated. 
 
 3. The third objection is derived from the 
 opinion now very generally gaining strength, 
 that man must have been in existence on the 
 earth more than four or even six thousand 
 years before the Christian era. 
 
 The arguments for the antiquity of man 
 are: 
 
 (1) Geological. 
 (2) Historical. 
 (3) Linguistic. 
 (4) Ethnological. 
 
 (1) The very eminent British geologist, 
 Sir C. Lyell, has attempted to prove, that 
 man, having been contemporary with the 
 mammoth and other extinct mammalia, must 
 have been living at least 100,000 years on the 
 earth. Although unfortunately in physical 
 science a great name always carries with it a 
 crowd of followers, far more than in politics, 
 literature or religion, yet in the present in- 
 stance Sir C. Lyell has failed to carry con- 
 viction to some of the most eminent of his con- 
 temporaries. Elie de Beaumont on the conti- 
 nent and several of the most distinguished 
 geologists in England demur to his conclu- 
 sions. ‘The conclusions are based on two 
 principal assumptions; first, that relics of 
 
ES hSe Vv, 
 
 man, flint instruments or the like, are found 
 in recent and post-pliocene formations, which 
 have been deposited in juxtaposition with 
 bones of the mammoth and other extinct 
 mammalia; secondly, that the present rate 
 of deposition must be reckoned as the normal 
 rate, and that at that rate the beds, which 
 overlie the extinct mammal and human re- 
 mains, must have taken a vast time to form. 
 Of course much depends on the argument 
 from uniformity. There are many men of 
 science, who, accepting Lyell’s general prin- 
 ciples, yet believe that in former ages there 
 were causes at work, which would have pro- 
 duced much speedier deposition and great- 
 er rapidity in the formation of beds of all 
 kinds, than we see going on at present. It 
 may perhaps be true, that man was coeval 
 with the mammoth; but a mammoth was 
 found early in this century in Siberia pre- 
 served in the ice, with skin and hair fitting it 
 to live in a cold climate, and with flesh upon it, 
 of which it was possible to make soup. Now, 
 even allowing for the great preserving power 
 of ice, there is neither proof nor probability 
 that this animal had been dead 100,000 years 
 or even more than 6,000 years. But again, it 
 seems probable that man was in existence at 
 a time when animals now inhabiting tropical 
 climates roamed at large in the forests of Gaul 
 and Britain. How long it may have taken to 
 reduce the climate of Great Britain from a 
 tropical to its present temperate condition, is 
 a question very difficult to solve. A change 
 in the Gulf Stream, an alteration in the re- 
 spective elevation of land and water, let alone 
 all question of the gradual cooling down of 
 the earth itself, would do much towards this. 
 Besides, not Auman bones, but only flint in- 
 struments are found in the gravel and caverns 
 with bones of extinct mammals. Moreover, 
 the present opinions of geologists rather go to 
 negative entirely the tropical character of the 
 British climatein the mammoth and tiger periods. 
 Sir Chas. Lyell admits that even now ‘the 
 Bengal tiger ranges occasionally to latitude 52° 
 North” (i.e. the latitude of England, and pro- 
 bably in a climate much colder than England), 
 ‘‘and abounds in latitude 48°, to which the 
 small tailless hare or pika, a polar resident, 
 sometimes wanders southwards” (‘ Antiq. of 
 Man,’ p. 158). We may see therefore many 
 contingencies which might have brought hu- 
 man remains into contact with the remains of 
 tropical animals, at a period much more recent 
 than that assigned to such proximity by this 
 eminent writer. 
 
 Difficulties of various kinds attach to Sir 
 Charles Lyell’s very large numbers; for in- 
 stance, at anything approaching to the present 
 rate of increase the descendants of a single 
 couple would have multiplied to nearly the 
 number of the present population in about 
 6000 years. Again, according to Sir C. Lyell’s 
 own admission, ‘we must remember, that 
 
 as yet we have no distinct geological evidence 
 that the appearance of what are called the 
 inferior races of mankind has always preceded 
 in chronological order that of the higher races,” 
 p- 90. On the contrary, it was shewn above 
 that the evidence which we have points to 
 some degree of civilization in the earliest 
 periods. Indeed had it not been so, it is 
 hardly possible that man should not soon have 
 become extinct in the presence of so many 
 animals whose mere physical powers were so 
 much greater than man’s. But then is it 
 credible, that for some go,000 years the hu- 
 man race should have been stationary, having 
 acquired almost from the first the art of mak- 
 ing flint instruments, but all farther progress 
 in the arts of civilization having apparently 
 been reserved to the last 6,000 years? Onthe 
 whole, it seems impossible not to conclude that 
 the geological evidence as to the antiquity of 
 man is as yet imperfect and imperfectly read. 
 
 (2) ‘The historical arguments are chiefly 
 derived from Egyptian sources; for, though 
 the Indians, the Chinese, and the Babylonians 
 profess to go back to hundreds of thousands 
 of years of past history, it is generally ad- 
 mitted that their historic times do not at the 
 very utmost extend farther back than to the 
 27th century B.c. The eminent Egyptologers, 
 Bunsen and Lepsius, relying on the monuments 
 of Egypt and the statements of Manetho, claim 
 for Egypt a national history from nearly 10,000 
 years B.C. It is, however, quite certain that 
 much of the evidence for this is of the vaguest 
 possible character, and that very large deduc- 
 tions must be made for myth and for con- 
 temporary dynasties. In all probability the 
 earliest Egyptian dynasty cannot be dated 
 farther back than B.C. 2700. (See ‘Aids to 
 Faith,’ Essay VI. 17, pp. 252 Sq., also ‘ Biblical 
 Dict.’ Arts. Chronology, Egypt, and the Ex- 
 cursus at the end of this volume). 
 
 (3) The linguistic argument is of this na- 
 ture. Languages are of slow growth. ‘The 
 divergence of several modern European lan- 
 guages from Latin has been comparatively 
 inconsiderable in 1500 years. Can we then 
 believe all languages to have been formed, and 
 to have diverged so widely from each other, 
 since the dispersion at Babel? One answer 
 to this is, that only those languages which 
 have a literature change slowly. As long 
 as the Authorised Version of the Scriptures 
 and the works of Shakspeare are read in 
 English, the English language will never be 
 much unlike what it is now, or what it was 
 three centuries ago. But where there is no 
 literature, a few years create a complete re- 
 volution; wild tribes in a single generation 
 cease to understand each other. And, even 
 keeping out of sight the miracle of the disper- 
 sion at Babel, emigration, which carried no 
 literature with it, would soon have created 
 an endless diversity of tongues. The chief 
 difficulty, however, is in the slow growth of 
 
 63 
 
64 
 
 GE NSIS Vie 
 
 languages to a high degree of grammatical 
 perfection, such as of Greek to the language of 
 Homer some goo years B.C., and of Sanskrit 
 to the language of the Vedas, nearly 1200 
 years B.c. But we must remember, that the 
 Samaritan and LX xX. chronology allow an 
 interval of more than 3000 years from the 
 Flood to the Christian era, and 1800 years 
 (the difference between 3000 and 1200) will 
 give considerable scope for grammatical de- 
 velopement. 
 
 (4) The ethnological argument is ground- 
 ed principally on the apparently unchanging 
 character of some of the races of mankind. 
 Especially it is observed, that in very ancient 
 Egyptian monuments the negro race is de- 
 picted with all its present features and pecu- 
 liarities. It would therefore be impossible, it 
 is argued, that all the varieties of man should 
 have sprung up, if their ancestors were a 
 single pair, brought into being not more than 
 6000 or 8000 years since. It is replied, that 
 supposing, which is disputed, the alleged an- 
 tiquity of the monuments in question, still 
 a race, continuing under nearly the same cir- 
 cumstances, is not likely to change since first 
 its peculiarities-were produced by those very 
 circumstances. Such has been the case with 
 the negroes since the time of the Egyptian 
 monuments. If we take the LX X. chronology 
 as correct, the negroes may have been in Africa 
 for nearly r500 years before the reign of 
 Sethos I., when we find them so clearly de- 
 picted on the monuments. ‘Their change to 
 that climate, their fixed habits of life, and 
 isolation from other races, may have soon im- 
 pressed a character upon them, which whilst 
 continuing to live under the same condition 
 ever since, they have never lost for a period 
 extending now to more than 3000 years. But 
 we witness rapid changes in race when cir- 
 cumstances rapidly change. ‘The European 
 inhabitants of the North American States are 
 said even in two or three generations to be 
 rapidly acquiring a similarity of feature and 
 conformation to the original inhabitants of 
 the soil, though not losing their European 
 intelligence and civilization. Many similar 
 facts are noticed; which prove that changes 
 of race, though sometimes so slow as to be 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 t The wickedness of the world, which provoked 
 Goa’s wrath, and caused the flood. 8 Noah 
 findeth grace. 14 The order, form, and end 
 of the ark. 
 
 ND it came to pass, when men 
 began to multiply on the face of 
 
 CHAP. VI.1. And it came to pass| ‘The 
 inspired writer has now given us an account 
 
 [v. t—3. 
 
 imperceptible, are at other times extremely 
 rapid. ‘The early condition of mankind, with 
 its frequent migrations, wide separations and 
 little intercommunion, must have been favour- 
 able to rapid change, whilst its later more 
 stationary condition is favourable to conti- 
 nuance and perpetuity of type. 
 
 - There is one other important objection 
 made to the genealogies in this chapter and in 
 Chapter xi. viz. that each gives a catalogue 
 of but ten generations; which looks as if 
 neither were historical. A probable solution 
 of this difficulty would seem to be, that the 
 genealogies neither were, nor were intended 
 to be, complete. Like other genealogies or 
 pedigrees, sacred and profane, they omitted 
 certain links, and perhaps only recorded and 
 handed down to posterity those ancestors of 
 the race who, for some reason or other, were 
 more than the rest deserving of remembrance. 
 This solution would be entirely satisfactory, 
 if it were not for the appearance of chronologi- 
 cal completeness which both the genealogies 
 exhibit in their present form; the age of the 
 patriarch at the birth of his son and suc- 
 cessor, and the number of years which he 
 lived after that birth, being given in every 
 case. If therefore the above explanation be 
 adopted, it would almost be necessary to add 
 that, in the course of transmission and tran- 
 scription, a greater appearance of completeness 
 had been given to the catalogues than had 
 existed in the original record. Such hypo- 
 theses are never to be too lightly adopted ; 
 but they are far more probable than those of 
 the modern critical school, which reject the 
 historical truth of the earlier books of the 
 Bible. ‘The genealogies of our Lord given in 
 the Gospels have undoubtedly some links 
 omitted, and yet are reduced to a form of 
 great completeness. ‘This is a strong argu- 
 ment for believing that the genealogies in 
 Genesis may have been treated in the same 
 manner. We may observe that this suppo- 
 sition, viz, that some links are omitted, will 
 allow a much greater antiquity to the race 
 of man, than may at first appear on the face 
 of the text of Scripture. In fact, if it be cor- 
 rect, the time which it would allow, is almost 
 unlimited. 
 
 the earth, and daughters were born 
 unto them, 
 
 2 That the sons of God saw the 
 daughters of men that they were fair; 
 and they took them wives of all which 
 they chose. 
 
 3 And the Lorp said, My spirit 
 
 of the first rise of sin, of its terrible manifest- 
 ation in the murder of Abel, of its further 
 
v. 3.] 
 
 shall not always strive with man, for 
 that he also zs flesh: yet his days 
 
 developement in the race of the first murder- 
 er, and of the separation from the profane of 
 the descendants of the pious Seth. He pro- 
 ceeds in this chapter to assign a reason for 
 the still more universal spread of ungodliness 
 throughout the world, such as to call down 
 from heaven a great general judgment on 
 mankind. 
 
 2. the sons of God saw the daughters of 
 men| Who were the sons of God? and who 
 the daughters of men? 
 
 1. Perhaps the most ancient opinion was 
 that the sons of God were the young men of 
 high rank (as in Ps. Ixxxii. 6, ‘I have said, 
 Ye are gods, and ye are all the sons of the 
 most Highest”), whilst the daughters of men 
 were the maidens of low birth and humble 
 condition; the word for men in this passage 
 being a word used at times to signify men of 
 low estate (cp. Isai. ii. 9, v. 15). According 
 to this interpretation the sin lay in the un- 
 bridled passions of the higher ranks of so- 
 ciety, their corrupting the wives and daugh- 
 ters of their servants and dependants, and the 
 consequent spread of universal licentiousness. 
 This seems to have been the earliest interpre- 
 tation among the Jews. It is adopted by the 
 Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan, by Sym- 
 machus, Abenezra, Rashi, Kimchi, and by 
 some moderns, Selden, Vorstius, and others. 
 The chief objection to this is that there is 
 scarcely proof enough that the name ‘‘sons 
 of God” was ever given to men of high rank, 
 or that the word for man (Adam) ever meant 
 people of low rank, except when contrasted 
 with another word for man (namely, Ish). 
 Compare vir and somo in Latin. 
 
 2. A second interpretation, also of great 
 antiquity, is that the sons of God were the 
 angels, who, moved to envy by the connubial 
 happiness of the human race, took to them- 
 selves human bodies, and married the fair 
 daughters of men. ‘This interpretation is 
 supposed to have the support of some ancient 
 MSS. of the LXX. (as mentioned by August. 
 ‘De Civ. Dei,’ xv. 23). It is argued that St 
 Jude (6, 7) evidently so understood it, as he 
 likens the sin of the angels to the sin of the cities 
 of the plain, ‘‘the going after strange flesh.” 
 The same is thought to be alluded to in 2 Pet. 
 ii. 4. Philo (‘De Gigant.’ Vol. 1. p. 262); Jo- 
 sephus (‘ Antiq.’ Lib. I. c. 4, § 1): and the most 
 ancient of the Christian fathers, as Justin 
 Martyr, Tatian, Athenagoras, Clement of 
 Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian, Lactantius, 
 moved probably by their reading of the LX X. 
 and being ignorant of Hebrew, adopted this 
 interpretation. ‘The Apocryphal Book of 
 Enoch and some of the Jewish writers also 
 expounded it so. The later fathers, Chryso- 
 
 GENESIS: -:V I. 
 
 shall be an hundred and twenty 
 years. 
 
 stom, Cyril of Alexandria, and Theodoret, 
 condemn this view as monstrous and profane, 
 The rationalistic interpreters (Gesenius, Ro- 
 senmiiller, Von Bohlen, Tuch, Knobel, Ewald, 
 Hupfeld, Kalisch, Davidson, &c.) naturally 
 prefer it, as favouring their belief, that the 
 first chapters of Genesis exhibit merely the 
 Hebrew mythology. But it is also adopted 
 by several of the more orthodox German 
 commentators, as Hofmann, Baumgarten, 
 Delitzsch, Kurtz, who contend that some 
 very portentous wickedness and excess of sin 
 must have been the cause of the Deluge; a 
 complete subverting of the whole order of 
 God’s creation, so that the essential condition 
 of man’s social life was imperilled and over- 
 thrown. ‘The chief arguments in favour of 
 this view are (1) that ‘‘sons of God” mostly 
 mean angels, see Ps. xxix. 1, Ixxxix. 7; Job. 
 6, ii, 1, xxxvili. 7; Dan. ili. 25; (2) that 
 the ‘daughters of men” can only be anti- 
 thetic to something not human; (3) that the 
 context assigns a monstrous progeny to this 
 unnatural union; (4) that St Jude and St Pe- 
 ter appear to sanction it; (5) that any ordi- 
 nary promiscuous marriages are not sufficient 
 to account for the judgment of the flood. 
 
 3. The third interpretation is that ‘the 
 sons of God” were the descendants of Seth, 
 who adhered to the worship and service of 
 the true God, and who, according to some 
 interpretations of ch. iv. 26, were from the 
 time of Enos called by the name of the Lord, 
 and that ‘‘the daughters of men” were of the 
 race of the ungodly Cain. ‘This was the be- 
 lief of the eminent Church fathers, Chryso- 
 stom, Cyril of Alexandria, Theodoret, Augus- 
 tine, and Jerome. It was adopted by Luther, 
 Calvin, and most of the reformers, and has 
 been the opinion of a great majority of mo- 
 dern commentators. 
 
 4. It was suggested, by Ilgen, that the 
 Cainites were called ‘‘sons of the gods” be- 
 cause of their ingenuity and inventions, and 
 that their intermingling themselves with the 
 other races of men caused the general corrup- 
 tion of mankind. 
 
 s. The author of ‘the Genesis of the 
 earth and of man’ suggests that ‘the sons of 
 the gods” (so he would render it) may mean 
 the worshippers of false gods. ‘These he looks 
 on as a pre-Adamite race, and would render, 
 not ‘daughters of men,” but ‘daughters of 
 Adam.” ‘The pre-Adamite worshippers of the 
 false gods intermarried with the daughters of 
 Adam. 
 
 Of these interpretations it appears most 
 probable that the right is a modification of 3. 
 Weare not probably justified in saying that 
 there were but two races descended from 
 
 E 
 
 65 
 
NEO ane 
 
 4 There were giants in the earth 
 in those days; and also after that, 
 when the sons of God came in unto 
 the daughters of men, and they bare 
 
 Adam, the race of Cain and the race of Seth. 
 Adam may have had many sons; but the his- 
 tory of the Cainites is preserved because both 
 of their impiety, and of their ingenuity; that 
 of the Sethites, because at least in one line of 
 that race piety and true religion flourished, 
 and of them came the family of Noah which 
 was preserved in the ark. ‘There appears to 
 have been a growing corruption of mankind, 
 more rapid, no doubt, in the family of Cain 
 than in any other race, but still spreading far 
 and wide. ‘The line of the Sethites, traced in 
 ch. v., alone appears to have kept itself pure, 
 the little Church of God, in the midst of 
 gathering darkness of the world around. This 
 little Church may well have been called ‘the 
 children of God,” a term by no means limited 
 in Scripture to the holy angels. ‘They alone 
 were the salt of the earth; and if that salt 
 should lose its savour, all would become 
 worthless and vile. When therefore some of 
 these ‘‘sons of God” went out from their 
 own little home circle, to make mixed mar- 
 riages with the general heathenized races 
 round them, the elements of corruption were 
 brought from the world into the Church, the 
 Church itself became corrupted, and the sin- 
 gle family of Noah appears to have been kept 
 pure from that corruption, just as afterwards 
 the family of Lot was the only family in 
 Sodom free from the pollution and depravity 
 of the cities of the plain. ‘The salt had lost 
 its savour. At all events too little was left 
 to purify and to save the world. It could 
 but save the souls of the few righteous that 
 were therein. 
 Concerning the giants, see note on v. 4. 
 
 3. My spirit shall not always strive| Is 
 rendered, (1) ‘shall not dwell” by LXX., 
 Vulg., Syr., Onk., Saad., and others. (2) 
 ‘*Shall not judge,” or which probably is the 
 same thing, “shall not strive/’ by Symm., 
 Targg. Joh. and Jerus., Rashi, Kimchi, Lu- 
 ther, Rosenmiiller, &c. ‘This is the rendering 
 of the A. V. and is probably correct. (3) 
 ‘¢ Shall not rule,” by De Wette, Rosenmiiller, 
 Maurer, Knobel, Delitzsch, &c. (4) ‘Shall 
 not be humbled,” Gesenius, Tuch, &c. No 
 great difference in the general significance of 
 the passage will be produced by adopting a 
 different translation. Kimchi, and some of 
 the German commentators, understand, not 
 that the Holy Ghost shall no longer dwell or 
 strive with man, but that the spiritual princi- 
 ple implanted by God in man shall no longer 
 rule in him, or no longer contend against his 
 animal nature. 
 
 Lv. 4, 5s 
 
 children to them, the same. became 
 mighty men which were of old, men 
 of renown. 
 
 5 { And Gop saw that the wicked- 
 
 for that he also is flesh| ‘The modern 
 interpreters, Gesenius, Vater, Schum, uch, 
 render ‘‘ Because of his error he is become 
 wholly flesh,” or, as Rosenmiiller, ‘ whilst 
 their flesh causeth them to err.” ‘The objec- 
 tion to the reading of the Authorized Version, 
 which is that of all ancient Versions and com- 
 mentators, is that the particle rendered that 
 never occurs in the Pentateuch, but only in 
 the later Psalms and other clearly more 
 modern books of the Old ‘Testament. It is 
 in fact an Aramean particle. But it must 
 never be forgotten, that Aramaisms are to be 
 expected, either in the most modern, or iz 
 the most ancient portions of Scripture. ‘There 
 is therefore good reason to adhere to the 
 Authorized Version. 
 
 yet his days shall be an hundred ana 
 taenty years] Josephus (‘ Ant.’ I. 3, 2) and 
 after him, Tuch, Ewald, Hiavernick, Baum- 
 garten, Knobel, Hupfeld, Davidson, &c., 
 suppose that this alludes to the shortening 
 of the term of human life. But all the 
 Targums, Saad., Luther’s Version, Rosenm., 
 Hengst., Ranke, Hofmann, Kurtz, Delitzsch, 
 understand ‘‘’There shall yet be a respite or 
 time for repentance of 120 years, before the 
 threatened vengeance shall overtake them.” 
 The normal duration of human life did not, 
 as Delitzsch truly observes, become from 
 this time 120 years, and the whole context 
 shews, that the judgment impending was that 
 of the Flood, and that it was a respite from 
 that, which is here promised, that time might 
 be given for Noah’s preaching, and man’s 
 repentance. ‘The only argument, that can 
 even appear to have weight against this in- 
 terpretation is that of ‘Tuch, repeated by Bp. 
 Colenso, viz. that Noah was 500 years old 
 (cp. ch. v. 32) when this saying, ‘¢ His days. 
 shall be 120,” is ascribed to the Almighty, 
 and that he was 600 years old (c. vil. 6) 
 when the Flood came. Hence there were 
 but roo years, not 120 given as a respite. 
 But there is really no ground whatever for 
 asserting that all which is related in ch. vi. 
 took place after Noah was 500 years old. 
 What is said in v. 32 is that Noah was 500 
 years old, when his three sons were born. 
 ‘The Deluge may have been threatened long 
 before this. 
 
 4. There were giants in the earth in those 
 days, and also after that, &c.| It is hence 
 argued that by ‘Sons of God” must be 
 meant angels or fallen angels; from the 
 union of whom with the daughters of man 
 sprang the race of giants. But there is no- 
 
i vi 6—x5,] GR NE SoM sl, 67 
 
 | ness of man was great in the earth, and 10 And Noah begat three sons, 
 or, he that "every imaginationofthe thoughts Shem, Ham, and Japheth. 
 
 jen of his “heart was only evil tcontinu- 11 The earth also was corrupt be- 
 Pa ord ally. fore God, and the earth was filed. 
 | er 6 And it repented the Lorp that with violence. 
 
 ie imagi- he had made man on the earth, and 12 And God looked upon the earth, 
 ‘take it grieved him at his heart. and, behold, it was corrupt; for all 
 m., * 7 And the Lorp said, I will de- flesh had corrupted his way upon the 
 
 ae ,, Stroy man whom I have created from earth. 
 
 * the face of the earth; tboth man, and 13 And God said unto Noah, ‘The 
 7 ‘5. beast, and the creeping thing, and the end of all flesh is come before me; 
 Heb. fowls of the air; for it repenteth me for the earth is filled with violence 
 
 very day. : 
 Heb. that I have made them. through them; and, behold, I will 
 iio beast, 8 But Noah found grace in the destroy 'them with the earth. UOr, from 
 
 the carth. 
 
 eyes of the Lorn. 14 4 Make thee an ark of gopher 
 @ These are the generations of wood; trooms shalt thou make in the t Heb. 
 
 (Becta, Noah: 6Noah was a just man and ark, and shalt pitch it within and che 
 
 ‘pet 2. 5. "perfect in his generations, and Noah without with pitch. 
 
 » an walked with God. 15 And this zs the fashion which 
 
 thing said of a race of giants springing from sentiments are even more than in the later 
 this union. ‘‘In those days were the (well- books of Scripture attributed to the Almighty. 
 known) Nephilim in the earth” cannot have No sound criticism would see any appearance 
 such a sense, especially when what follows of myth in this. 
 is taken into account, ‘‘and also after that, ylis 
 when the sons of God went in unto the es, ve Gia SOC O Ol ec 
 daughters of men, and they bore children vale 
 to them, these became mighty men, men of 14. an ark of gopher wood| ‘The word 
 renown.” Evidently the passage shews, that for ark occurs only here and in Exod. ii. 3, 
 Nephilim were on earth before this union, 5 of the ark or boat of papyrus or bulrushes. 
 and afterwards also from these marriages ‘This word might perhaps lead us to suppose 
 sprang men of warlike spirit, who made that the ark was of the form of a vast chest 
 themselves a name. ‘The result was, as when or coffer, rather than of the form of a ship; 
 the Israelites afterwards made marriages with fitted to carry a heavy burden, not to sail 
 the Midianites, a great and general corruption over the waters; yet the proportions given 
 of manners. ‘The warlike character and per- are those of a ship, though of rather greater 
 haps bodily strength of these Nephilim is speci- width than usual, see on v. 15. 
 ally noted, as explaining what is said in v. 13, gopher woo It is uncertain what this 
 that the earth was filled. with violence. a Sera. ae Targumists followed by 
 Nephilim. The LXX., Vulg., Syr., and many Jewish and Christian commentators 
 Targum render ‘“ Giants;” Ag. and Symm. rendered Cedar, others Juniper or Box. Ful- 
 ‘violent men.” Most derive the word from a__ler, Bochart and Celsius suggested Cypress, in 
 root signifying to fa//; and understand “the which they have been followed by most 
 fallen” (whether men or angels), or, more modern commentators. The affinity between 
 probably, ‘‘those who fall on others,” rob- the roots gophar and cupar is great, and cypress 
 bers or tyrants. (Aquila, Rosenm., Gesenius, is a wood well fitted for ship-building and 
 Kurtz.) Others (among whom Tuch and abounding in the parts of Syria next to Ba- 
 Knobel) derive from a root signifying won- bylon, which many have supposed to be the 
 der, and understand monsters, prodigies. We country inhabited by Noah. 
 meet with the name again Num. xiii. 33, as rooms) literally nests, different compart- 
 anit : ) part 
 that of one of the Canaanitish tribes, who ments ped mae a habitation of men’ aid 
 appear to have been men of large stature, jnimals 
 as were the Rephaim, the Anakim and others. oe ; 
 This very likely was the reason, why the pitch| more probably asphaltos, bitumen, 
 which is said to be particularly suited for 
 
 word came to be rendered ‘ giants,” which : , : é 
 does not seem to have been its original closing up the interstices of the timbers and 
 making a vessel watertight. 
 
 meaning. 
 
 6. it repented the LORD] All the language 15. this is the fashion] The actual form 
 
 of this portion of Scripture is suited to the of the ark is not described. ‘The propor- 
 
 infant condition of the world. Hence human tions only are given, which are not very 
 Bie 
 
68 
 
 GENE OTS. vel. 
 
 thou shalt make it of: The length of 
 the ark shall be three hundred cubits, 
 the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the 
 height of it thirty cubits. 
 
 16 A window shalt thou make to 
 the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou 
 finish it above; and the door of the 
 ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; 
 with lower, second, and third stories 
 shalt thou make it. 
 
 17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring 
 
 different from those of ‘‘ The Great Eastern.” 
 Reckoning the cubit at 21 inches; the pro- 
 portions would be length 525 ft., breadth 87 
 ft. 6in., height 52 ft. 6in.; those of ‘“*Tke 
 Great Eastern” being length 680, breadth 83, 
 depth 58. (See Smith’s ‘ Dict. of Bible,’ Art. 
 Noah.) ‘The length of the cubit is doubtful, 
 as there appear to have been 2 or 3 differ- 
 ent measures so called. In all probability 
 it means the length from the elbow to the 
 end of the hand, a variable measure, of 
 course, but sufficiently accurate for the pur- 
 poses of those simple times. It is mentioned 
 by the German commentators that Peter Jan- 
 sen in 1609 built a vessel of the same pro- 
 portions as the ark, though smaller, viz. 
 Length 120, width 20, depth 12 ft. It was 
 found most convenient for stowage, contain- 
 ing one-third more freight than ordinary ves- 
 sels of the same tonnage, though it was 
 unsuited for making way quickly through 
 the water. 
 
 John Temporarius quoted by Heidegger 
 (‘ Historia Sacra,’ I. p. 338) made a curious 
 calculation, according to which the ark would 
 have afforded abundant room for all the 
 animals then known, and food for their 
 voyage. ‘Tiele also in his commentary cal- 
 culates that there was room for 7000 distinct 
 species, (See Kurtz, I. p. rot.) 
 
 16. A window shalt thou make to the 
 ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above] 
 There is a great variety of interpretation 
 here, some rendering a window, others light, 
 or daylight or a transparent substance, others, 
 after the LX X., an inclined roof, or sloping deck. 
 Much too has been said against the historical 
 truth of a narrative, which could assign but 
 one window of a cubit long to so vast a 
 ship. ‘The interpretation of Gesenius seems 
 evidently the true, viz. that the unusual word 
 translated ‘‘ window” (the word in ch. viii. 6, is 
 quite another word) means really a set of 
 windows, a window course, a system of 
 lighting: and the use of the feminine gender 
 in the pronoun suggests to the same high 
 authority, that the right rendering would be, 
 ‘‘ A window system shalt thou make to the 
 
 [v. 16—r9. 
 
 a flood of waters upon the earth, to 
 destroy all flesh, wherein zs the breath 
 of life, from under heaven; and every 
 thing that zs in the earth shall die. 
 
 18 But with thee will I establish 
 my covenant; and thou shalt come 
 into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and 
 thy wife, and thy sons’ wives with 
 thee. 
 
 19 And of every living thing of all 
 
 flesh, two of every sort shalt thou 
 
 ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish them 
 from above.” It is quite possible that it may 
 have been a window course running for a 
 cubit long under the top or deck of the ark, 
 lighting the whole upper story very similar to 
 the clerestory of churches (see Knobel here). 
 The word is translated by Symmachus ‘a 
 transparency.” It seems not impossible that 
 some transparent substance was used. ‘This 
 may easily have been known to the Ante- 
 diluvians, who had made the progress in arts 
 described ch. iv. 21, 22. Perhaps the inven- 
 tion was lost after the Deluge, an event 
 which must have reduced mankind to almost 
 original simplicity and rudeness. It is by 
 no means clear, that these windows were all 
 in the roof or deck. ‘They may have been in 
 the gunwales, z.e. on the higher part of the 
 sides of the vessel, like the port-holes of a 
 modern ship of war. And, if they were 
 covered with a transparent substance, it is 
 quite possible that they may not have been 
 confined to the upper story of the ship, as 
 the word ‘ above” does not necessarily mean 
 on the upper part of the vessel, but may 
 mean the top of the window course. 
 
 the door of the ark| ‘There was naturally 
 but one opening beside the window course, 
 through which all the inhabitants of the ark 
 were to be let into it. 
 
 19. two of every sort shalt thou bring 
 into the ark| Of course if we will admit no- 
 thing out of the ordinary course of nature, 
 we shall be unable to receive the Mosaic 
 history of the Deluge. Yet, even on natural 
 principles, we may in some measure explain 
 Noah’s power over the beasts. When a 
 terrible catastrophe is closely impending, 
 there is often a presentiment of it in the 
 brute creation. Under the pressure of great 
 danger or great suffering, the wildest animals 
 will at times become perfectly tame and 
 tractable. Most likely too, Noah and his 
 family would choose pairs of very young 
 animals, just old enough to feed them- 
 selves, as being the most tractable and as 
 requiring less room than those full grown, 
 
¢ Heb. 11. 
 7- 
 
 v. 20—4. | 
 
 bring into the ark, to keep them alive 
 with thee; they shall be male and 
 female. 
 
 20 Of fowls after their kind, and 
 of cattle after their kind, of every 
 creeping thing of the earth after his 
 kind, two of every sort shall come 
 unto thee, to keep them alive. 
 
 21 And take thou unto thee of all 
 food that is eaten, and thou shalt 
 gather 7t to thee; and it shall be for 
 food for thee, and for them. 
 
 22 ©“Thus did Noah; according to 
 all that God commanded him, so did he. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 1 Noah, with his family, and the living crea- 
 tures, enter into the ark. 17 The beginning, 
 increase, and continuance of the flood. 
 
 If the ark was to hold, not only birds and 
 quadrupeds, but insects and reptiles, possibly 
 eggs or larve may have been preserved. 
 
 Cuap. VII. 1. And the LorD said unto 
 Noah] ‘The preceding chapter accounts for 
 a period of 120 years. At the beginning of 
 that period, God had declared His will to 
 destroy mankind by a flood, unless they 
 profited by the time still given them for 
 repentance. Noah is ordered to prepare an 
 ark, the building of which may have occu- 
 pied the greater part of this season of respite. 
 He is told at the very first that he and his 
 sons are to go into the ark, and that a pair 
 of every kind of cattle and fowls and moving 
 things should go in with him and be pre- 
 served alive. In the present chapter we 
 reach the end of the 120 years. ‘The ark 
 has been built in the prescribed form with 
 due preparation and capacity. Noah has 
 done according to all that God had com- 
 manded him (ch. vi. 22), and now the Lord 
 gives to Noah fuller directions concerning the 
 animals which he was to take with him. 
 
 2. Of every clean beast thou shalt take to 
 thee by sevens, the male and his female] It is 
 questioned whether there were to be seven or 
 seven pairs of every clean beast. Some think 
 there were to be.only seven, the odd number 
 being accoun« 4 for by the fact that the 
 clean beasts were preserved for sacrifice, that 
 therefore more of them were needed than of 
 unclean beasts, and the number seven was 
 adopted as a sacred number. ‘The addition 
 of the words ‘the male and his female” 
 (comp. v. 9), seems to favour the belief that 
 seven pairs are intended. In any case there is 
 no inconsistency between this verse and ch. 
 vi. 20, ‘two of every sort.” The command 
 
 GENE STS. av 1. 
 
 VII. 
 
 ND the *Lorp said unto Noah, «2 Pet. 2. 
 
 Come thou and all thy house * 
 into the ark; for thee have I seen 
 righteous before me in this genera- 
 tion. 
 
 2. Of every clean beast thou shalt 
 
 take to thee by tsevens, the male and t Heb. se. 
 his female: and of beasts that are not “” ***”* 
 
 clean by two, the male and his female. 
 
 3 Of fowls also of the air by sevens, 
 the male and the female; to keep 
 seed alive upon the face of all the 
 earth. 
 
 4 For yet seven days, and I will 
 cause it to rain upon the earth forty 
 days and forty nights; and every liv- 
 ing substance that I have made will I 
 
 'destroy from off the face of the earth. po but 
 
 here is but an amplification of the former 
 injunction, which had probably been given 
 120 years before. In the first instance it 
 was said that Noah’s family should be pre- 
 served together with a pair of every kind of 
 beast. In the second, that, whilst the general 
 rule should be the saving of a single pair, 
 yet, in the case of the few clean beasts, there 
 should be preserved, not one pair only but 
 seven. ‘The objection that this was an anti- 
 cipation of the Levitical distinction of beasts 
 into clean and unclean, is wholly groundless. 
 The boundary line between clean and un- 
 clean animals is marked by nature. Every 
 tribe of mankind would distinguish between 
 the sheep and the hyzna, between the dove 
 and the vulture. Whether animal food was 
 eaten before the Deluge or not, it is certain 
 that flocks and herds were fed for the sake of 
 their milk and wool, and that of them victims 
 were offered in sacrifice. This alone would 
 separate between the clean and the unclean. 
 It is not improbable, that the distinction even 
 of the names ‘‘clean and unclean” had been 
 fully established by custom, long before it 
 was recognized and ratified by the Law. 
 
 3. Of fowls also of the air by sevens| Inthe 
 Samaritan, the LX X. and Syr. this verse runs, 
 ‘¢ And of all the fowls of the air which are 
 clean by sevens, the male and the female, and 
 of all fowls which are not clean by two, the 
 male and the female, to keep seed alive upon 
 the face of all the earth.” This must have 
 been a very ancient reading; but it appears 
 to have arisen from a gloss or commentary 
 having crept into the text. It probably gives 
 the true sense of the passage. 
 
 4. yet seven days| The 120 years ended 
 and the ark prepared for the saving of his 
 house, Noah is allowed yet seven days more 
 
7° 
 
 1 Or, ov 
 
 GEN STS. evel ls 
 
 5 And Noah did according unto all 
 that the Lorp commanded him. 
 
 6 And Noah was six hundred years 
 old when the flood of waters was up- 
 on the earth. 
 
 7 4 And Noah went in, and his 
 sons, and his wife, and his sons’ wives 
 with him, into the ark, because of the 
 waters of the flood. 
 
 8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts 
 that are not clean, and of fowls, and 
 of every thing that creepeth upon the 
 earth, 
 
 9g There went in two and two unto 
 Noah into the ark, the male and the 
 female, as God had commanded 
 Noah. 
 
 10 And it came to pass after seven 
 
 oe seventh days, that the waters of the flood were 
 
 upon the earth. 
 11 4 In the six hundredth year of 
 
 [v. 5—15. 
 
 Noah’s life, in the second month, the 
 seventeenth day of the month, the 
 same day were all the fountains of 
 the great deep broken up, and the 
 ' windows of heaven were opened, 
 
 12 And the rain was upon the 
 earth forty days and forty nights. 
 
 13 In the selfsame day entered 
 Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Ja- 
 pheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah’s 
 wife, and the three wives of his sons 
 with them, into the ark; 
 
 14 They, and every beast after his. 
 kind, and all the cattle after their kind, 
 and every creeping thing that creepeth 
 upon the earth after his kind, and 
 every fowl after his kind, every bird 
 of every ‘sort. 
 
 15 And they went in unto Noah 
 into the ark, two and two of all flesh, 
 wherein zs the breath of life, 
 
 for gathering all safely into the place of 
 refuge before the flood sets in. 
 
 9. two and two| ‘This again is no con- 
 tradiction to v. 2. The rule was that all 
 animals, clean or unclean, should go in two 
 and two, that rule was not broken, but am- 
 plified, by the direction in verse 2, that of 
 elean animals there should be more than a 
 single pair, viz. seven or seven pairs. 
 
 lI. In the six hundredth year of Noah's 
 life, in the second month, the seventeenth day 
 of the month| ‘The questions concerning the 
 Deluge year are complicated by the uncer- 
 tainty, x. whether the year was the old civil 
 year beginning with the month Tisri in the 
 autumn, or the sacred year which from the 
 time of the Exodus was appointed to begin 
 with the month Abib, the Passover month, 
 in the spring: 2. whether the calculation be 
 Lunar or Solar. 
 
 As regards the first question, we may no- 
 tice that the year did not begin from Abib, un- 
 til the time of the Exodus, and that even then 
 the civil year was reckoned from Tisri. Hence 
 we may naturally conclude, that the year of 
 the Flood began with ‘Tisri, or about the 
 autumnal Equinox. If so, the 17th day of 
 the second month would bring us to the 
 middle of November, the beginning of the 
 wintry and rainy season. 
 
 The second question seems at first sight 
 resolved by comparing this verse (vii. 11) with 
 vil. 24 and viii. 4, from which comparison it 
 appears that the flood began on the 17th of 
 the second month, lasted 150 days, i.e. five 
 months of 30 days, and had subsided, so that 
 
 the ark could rest on Ararat on the 17th of 
 the seventh month. Thus the 17th of the 
 seventh month appears to have been exactly 
 five months of thirty days after the 17th of 
 the second month. This would make the 
 Noachic year a year of 360 days, correspond- 
 ing with the old Egyptian year, unless any 
 intercalation of five days was made use of. 
 On the presumption that this reckoning is 
 conclusive, it has been argued that the account 
 of the Flood must have been of much later 
 date than Moses, as the Israelites never learn- 
 ed to reckon by solar time till after the Baby- 
 lonish captivity. It is certain however that 
 the Egyptians used solar time long before the 
 date of the Exodus, which is answer enough 
 to this difficulty. . 
 
 With regard to the forty days’ rain, it 
 seems pretty certain that those were not addi- 
 tional to, but part of, the 150 days of the 
 prevalence of the flood. Supposing the above 
 calculation to be correct, we have the very 
 remarkable coincidences that on the 17th day 
 of Abib the ark rested on Mount Ararat—on 
 the 17th day of Abib the Israelites passed 
 over the Red Sea—on the t7th day of Abib 
 Christ our Lord rose again stom the dead. 
 
 were all the fountains of the great deep 
 broken up, and the windows of heaven were 
 opened] It cannot be imagined, that this is a 
 philosophical explanation of the flood. ‘The 
 use of Scripture is always to describe the 
 phenomena of nature, not to trace their hid- 
 den causes. The words here written express 
 only the effect produced upon man’s senses. 
 ‘There was a flood of waters from above and 
 
 l Or, 
 Jiloodgates, 
 
 t Heb, 
 wing. 
 
6Wisd. 10. 
 
 4. 
 
 v. 16—4.] 
 
 16 And they that went in, went 
 in male and female of all flesh, as God 
 had commanded him: and the Lorp 
 shut him in. 
 
 17 And the flood was forty days 
 upon the earth; and the waters in- 
 creased, and bare up the ark, and it 
 was lift up above the earth. 
 
 18 And the waters prevailed, and 
 were increased greatly upon the earth ; 
 and the ark went upon the face of 
 the waters. 
 
 1g And the waters prevailed ex- 
 ceedingly upon the earth; and all the 
 high hills, that were under the whole 
 heaven, were covered. 
 
 20 Fifteen cubits upward did the 
 waters prevail; and the mountains 
 were covered. 
 
 21 8And all flesh died that moved 
 upon the earth, both of fowl, and of 
 cattle, and of beast, and of every creep- 
 ing thing that creepeth upon the earth, 
 
 GENESIS. 
 
 VIT. VIII. 
 
 the creeping things, and the fowl of 
 the heaven; and they were destroyed 
 
 from the earth: and “Noah only re- ¢ Wisd. ro. 
 mained alive, and they that were with a Pet are 
 
 him in the ark. 
 24 And the waters prevailed upon 
 the earth an hundred and fifty days. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 1 The waters asswage. 4 The ark resteth on 
 Ararat. 7 Theraven and the dove. 15 Noah, 
 being commanded, 18 goeth forth of the ark. 
 20 He buildeth an altar, and offereth sacrifice, 
 a1 which God accepteth, and promiseth to curse 
 the earth no more. 
 
 ND God remembered Noah, and 
 every living thing, and all the 
 cattle that was with him in the ark: 
 and God made a wind to pass over 
 the earth, and the waters asswaged ; 
 2 The fountains also of the deep 
 and the windows of heaven were 
 stopped, and the rain from heaven 
 was restrained ; 
 3 And the waters returned from off 
 
 the earth tcontinually: and after the t Heb. 
 
 in going 
 
 and every man: 
 
 fied... 02 Ail in whose nostrils was tthe end of the hundred and fifty days and ve- 
 ike ” breath of life, of all that was in the the waters were abated. ciate © 
 bie of dry land, died. 4 And the ark rested in the seventh 
 
 23 And every living substance was 
 destroyed which was upon the face of 
 the ground, both man, and cattle, and 
 
 from beneath. The clouds poured down rain, 
 and the seas and rivers swelled and burst their 
 boundaries; so that to one who witnessed it 
 it seemed as though ‘the fountains of the 
 
 great deep were broken up, and the windows 
 
 of heaven were opened.” 
 
 16. and the LorD shut him in| By some 
 providential or supernatural agency the door 
 of the ark, which could not have been secured 
 with pitch or bitumen by Noah, was secured 
 and made water-tight. 
 
 17, 18,19. In these verses the frequent 
 repetition of the same thought in almost the 
 same words has been supposed by Astruc and 
 others to evidence the work of different 
 hands. Repetition, however, is universal in 
 a simple state of society, wherever great 
 strength of expression is aimed at. Even in 
 late Hebrew such repetition is familiar, but in 
 early Hebrew it meets us at every turn. 
 
 2.0. Fifteen cubits upward] 7. é. from 25 
 to 28 feet: a depth apparently above the 
 neighbouring mountains, perhaps depressed by 
 convulsion, or otherwise. See note on the 
 Deluge at the end of the eighth chapter. 
 
 month, on the seventeenth day of the 
 month, upon the mountains of Ara- 
 rat. 
 
 Cyap. VIII. 1. God remembered Noah] 
 As it is said, x Sam. xv. 11, ‘It repenteth 
 Me that I have anointed Saul to be king,” 
 je. I have decreed to put another in his 
 place, and above (Gen. vi. 7), ‘It repenteth 
 Me that I have made man,” 7.e. I have deter- 
 mined to destroy man; so here ‘“ The Lord 
 remembered Noah” does not point to a pre- 
 vious forgetfulness, but to God's great mercy 
 towards him (Theodoret). 
 
 2. The fountains, &c.| ‘The clouds were 
 dispersed by a wind, the waters no longer 
 increased, and the effect was, as though, after 
 the forty days of rain and flood, the foun- 
 tains of the deep and the windows of heaven 
 were closed. 
 
 4. Ararat) The belief that this is the 
 mountain-range now commonly called Mount 
 Ararat, the highest peak of which rises nearly 
 17,000 feet above the level of the sea, rests on 
 a very uncertain foundation. Far more pro- 
 bable is the opinion that Ararat was the 
 ancient name of Armenia itself, or, rather, of 
 the Southern portion of Armenia. ‘The name 
 occurs only here, and in 2 Kings xix. 37; Is, 
 XXxvii. 38, where it is mentioned as the place 
 
CE NEST Sey tein, 
 
 [v. 5—r0, 
 
 72 
 
 t Heb. 5 And the waters ‘decreased con- 8 Also he sent forth a dove 
 toing and tinually until the tenth month: in the from him, to see if the waters were 
 wecreas tenth month, on the first day of the abated from off the face of the 
 4 month, were the tops of the mountains ground ; 
 seen. g But the dove found no rest for 
 6 4 And it came to pass at the end the sole of her foot, and she returned 
 of forty days, that Noah opened the unto him into the ark, for the waters 
 window of the ark which he had were on the face of the whole earth: 
 made: then he put forth his hand, and took 
 as 7 And he sent forth a raven, which her, and tpulled her in unto him intot Hoe 
 eb. 4 caused her 
 in going went forth ‘to and fro, until the waters the ark. to come. 
 ntiserg, were dried up from off the earth. 10 And he stayed yet other seven 
 
 to which the sons of Sennacherib fled, after 
 the murder of their father. Most of the 
 ancient VSS. render the word by Armenia 
 (Aq., Symm., Theod., Vulg., and in Kings 
 and Isaiah the LXX., though in Gen. the 
 LXX. leave it untranslated). The Targums 
 render Kardu or Kardon, probably meaning 
 Kurdistan, or the Gordyzan mountains, 
 which run to the South of Armenia, dividing 
 the valley of the Tigris from Iran, on, or 
 near to which mountains, in the Chaldzan 
 tradition of the Deluge preserved by Bero- 
 sus, Xisuthrus is said to have landed. Jerome 
 (‘on Isai.’ xxxvii.) tells us, that ‘‘ Ararat is a 
 champaign country of incredible fertility, 
 situated in Armenia, at the base of Mount 
 Taurus, through which flows the river 
 Araxes.” Moses, Archbishop of Chorene, A.D. 
 460, the famous historian of Armenia, also 
 tells us that Ararat was a region, not a moun- 
 tain. A Mohammedan tradition has no doubt 
 placed the site of the ark’s resting on the 
 top of the highest ridge of the mountain, 
 called anciently Macis, by the Persians Coh 
 Noah; and this has been thought to corre- 
 spond with what is related by Nicolaus of 
 Damascus, that there was a mountain in Ar- 
 menia called Baris, to which people escaped 
 in the general Deluge, and on which a vessel 
 struck, parts of which long remained (Jo- 
 seph. ‘Ant.’1I.4). All this, however, is some- 
 what vague. We can only say with certainty 
 that, so long as the time when the LXX. VS. 
 was made, Ararat was believed to correspond 
 with, or to constitute a part of Armenia. 
 Moreover, general belief has pointed to the 
 neighbourhood of Armenia as the original 
 dwelling-place of the first fathers of man- 
 kind. 
 
 Yet the claims, not only of the central 
 mountain peak, but even of any portion of 
 Armenia, to be the site of Noah’s landing- 
 place, have been disputed by many. In Gen, 
 xi. 2 the migration of the sons of Noah to- 
 wards Shinar is said to be ‘‘from the East.” 
 If so, it could not have been from Armenia, 
 It is, however, most probable that the right 
 rendering should be, as in Gen. ii. 8, xill. 11, 
 not ‘‘from the East” but ‘ eastward,” and 
 
 such is the marginal rendering of the A.V. 
 which though not supported by the VSS. is 
 accordant with other Hebrew idioms (see 
 Quarry, ‘Gen.’ p. 397). Another objection to 
 Armenia is found in the statement of Strabo 
 (lib. XI. p. 527), that the vine does not grow 
 there (cp. Gen. ix. 20). Accordingly Har- 
 douin contends that Ararat could not have 
 been in Armenia, but is to be sought for in 
 the North of Palestine, where it borders on 
 Antilibanus and Syria (‘ De Situ Parad. terres.’ 
 in Franzii, Edit. Plin. ‘Nat. Hist.’ Tom. x. 
 Pp. 259, 260). Yet the 10,000 are said to 
 have found old wine in Armenia (Xen. ‘ Anab.’ 
 4. 4, 9); and vines are said at this day to 
 grow in the highlands of Armenia, at a level 
 of 4000 feet above the sea. (See Ritter, quoted 
 by Knobel, on ch. 1x. 20.) Von Bohlen, 
 arguing from Gen. xi. 2 that Ararat lay east- 
 ward of Shinar, identifies it with Aryavarta, 
 the sacred land to the North of India, to 
 which the Hindoo tradition points. The 
 Samaritan VS. places it in the Island of 
 Ceylon. Though on such a question cer- 
 tainty is impossible, the arguments in favour 
 of Armenia are very strong. 
 
 6. the window] or opening, from a verb 
 meaning to perforate or open. ‘This is quite 
 a different word from that used vi. 16. ‘The 
 A.V. would suggest the idea, that Noah was 
 commanded (vi. 16) to make a window, and 
 that now he opened that window; whereas 
 the original expresses the fact, that Noah was 
 commanded to make a window-course, or 
 light system, and that now he opens the win- 
 dow, or casement, in the ark, which he had 
 made on purpose to open. 
 
 7. went forth to and fro| It has been 
 supposed that there were carcases of men and 
 beasts floating on the waters, that from them 
 the raven found a place to light upon, and 
 also food; and hence, though it returned 
 from time to time and rested on the ark, it 
 never again sought an entrance into it. 
 
 8. a dove| Noah, finding no sufficient 
 indication from the raven, now sends forth 
 the dove, a bird which rests only on dry 
 places and feeds only on grain, 
 
Vv. II—20.] 
 
 days; and again he sent forth the 
 dove out of the ark; 
 
 11 And the dove came in to him 
 in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth 
 was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah 
 knew that the waters were abated 
 from off the earth. 
 
 12 And he stayed yet other seven 
 days; and sent forth the dove; which 
 returned not again unto him any more. 
 
 13 { And it came to pass in the 
 six hundredth and first year, in the 
 first month, the first day of the month, 
 the waters were dried up from off the 
 earth: and Noah removed the cover- 
 ing of the ark, and looked, and, be- 
 hold, the face of the ground was dry. 
 
 14 And in the second month, on 
 the seven and twentieth day of the 
 month, was the earth dried. 
 
 15 { And God spake unto Noah, 
 saying, 
 
 11. an olive leaf | ‘Theophr. ‘ Hist. 
 Plant.’ L. Iv. c. 8, and Pliny, ‘ Hist. Nat.’ L. 
 XIII. c. 25, are cited as saying that the olive 
 grew under water in the Red Sea, and bore 
 berries there. Whether this be so or not, it 
 is probable that the olive may live more 
 healthily under a flood than most other trees. 
 It is eminently hardy, and will grow in a 
 favourable soil without care or culture. ‘The 
 following passage illustrates the extraordinary 
 powers of adaptation to circumstances pos- 
 sessed by some plants. ‘‘’The formation of 
 sprouts gives the plant the means of attach- 
 ing itself to the most varied conditions, of 
 persisting through periods of continued cold 
 and heat, damp or drought, according as the 
 climate may produce, and guarding against 
 death in all cases of frustrated seed-develop- 
 TRENC sss & Thus Littorella lacustris, which 
 never flowers under water, maintains and in- 
 creases itself by lateral runners, year after 
 year, at the bottom of the lakes of the Black 
 Forest, and only comes into flower when the 
 water retreats in the driest years, which 
 scarcely occur oftener than once in ten” (A. 
 Braun, ‘Rejuvenescence in Nature,’ p. 41, 42, 
 Ray Society). ‘The olive (Olea Europea) is 
 generally a plant of the Mediterranean: other 
 species occur at the Cape of Good Hope, 
 the Himalaya mountains, and elsewhere. 
 
 pluckt off | rather, as Vulg., fresh. 
 
 20. 
 every beast which was afterwards permitted 
 to the Israelites for food, but those which 
 were esteemed clean for sacrifice; viz. oxen, 
 sheep and goats, doves and pigeons, Some 
 
 every clean beast] Probably not 
 
 GENESIS. VIII. 
 
 16 Go forth of the ark, thou, and 
 thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons’ 
 wives with thee. 
 
 17 Bring forth with thee every 
 living thing that zs with thee, of all 
 flesh, both of fowl, and of cattle, and 
 of every creeping thing that creepeth 
 upon the earth; that they may breed 
 abundantly in the earth, and be 
 fruitful, and multiply upon the 
 earth. 
 
 18 And Noah went forth, and his 
 sons, and his wife, and his sons’ wives 
 with him: 
 
 1g Every beast, every creeping 
 thing, and every fowl, and whatso- 
 ever creepeth upon the earth, after 
 their ‘kinds, 
 ark. 
 
 20 4 And Noah builded an altar 
 unto the Lorp; and took of every 
 clean beast, and of every clean fowl, 
 
 of the German commentators see in the ac- 
 count of this sacrifice a late interpolation, 
 derived from the Mosaic or Levitical customs 
 of sacrifice. Delitzsch justly observes that 
 in most of the traditions of the Deluge, ex- 
 ternal to the Israelites, as the Phcenician, 
 Indian, Greek, &c., a sacrifice forms part of 
 the legend. ‘The pretence, therefore, that in 
 the Biblical narrative this was an afterthought 
 of a Jehovist interpolater must be gratuitous. 
 
 21. a sweet savour| Lit. “the savour 
 of satisfaction or delectation,” the word 
 Nichoach, ‘ satisfaction,” having a reference 
 to Noach, *rest.” Cp. like expressions in 
 Levrilera,eXSvic gt; Ezek. 5vi9,.14,2 x.) 41, 
 ‘The gratitude of Noah, and his faith as mani- 
 fested by the sacrifice, were acceptable to 
 God. 
 
 for the imagination of man’s heart is 
 evil from his youth] Inch. vi. 5, it is writ- 
 ten that God’s anger was moved, ‘‘ because 
 every imagination of the thoughts of his heart 
 was only evil continually.” Here, on the 
 contrary it is said, that ‘‘the Lord said in His 
 heart, I will not curse the ground any more 
 for man’s sake, for the imagination of his 
 heart is evil from his youth.” ‘The Germans 
 discover an inconsistency between the words 
 of the Elohist in vi. 5, and those of the Je- 
 hovist here. Some have endeavoured to recon- 
 cile these passages by translating ‘‘ although” 
 instead of ‘‘for.” ‘The true solution is, that 
 in the first instance (ch. vi. 5) the actual sin- 
 fulness of man, the constant tendency of every 
 imagination of his thoughts to evil, is repre- 
 sented as moving the anger of God, and tend- 
 
 went forth out of the t Heb. 
 
 Papas 
 SJamilies. 
 
| 
 | 
 
 22 'While the earth remaineth, t Heb. 
 
 tall 
 seedtime and harvest, and cold and v2 days of 
 
 74 GENESIS. VIII. [vs 2%, 28. 
 and offered burnt offerings on the 7s evil from his youth; neither will I 
 altar. again smite any more every thing living, 
 
 + Heb ‘ 21 And the Lorp smelled tasweet as I have done. 
 
 savour; and the Lorp said in his 
 heart, I will not again curse the 
 
 @ chap. 6 . 
 5. ground any more for man’s sake; heat, and summer and winter, and “°7” 
 yt for the “imagination of man’s heart day and night shall not cease. 
 
 ing to man’s destruction; but in the present 
 instance (ch. viii. 21) the Lord is described as 
 considering the feebleness of his nature, and 
 pitying that natural propensity to evil, which 
 every man inherits at his birth. 
 
 The word in the original for imagination, 
 is the word which the Rabbins used to ex- 
 press that desire of evil, which results from 
 original sin (Buxt. ‘ Lex. Chald.’ p. 973; Ges. 
 ‘'Thes.’ p. 619). Accordingly in ch. vi. we see 
 God’s righteous indignation against the hard- 
 ened, impenitent, unbelieving sinner. Here, 
 on the contrary, we read of the Lord’s com- 
 passionate kindness to His feeble and erring 
 
 NOTE A on CHAP. VIII. 
 
 (a) ‘Traditions among all races of men. 
 
 1. Was it historical ? 
 
 the supposition of historical foundation. 2 
 
 judge of the narrative. (8) Universal 
 culties. (6) Rationale of Deluge. 
 
 Two great questions concerning the Flood of 
 Noah naturally present themselves: 1. Is the 
 account of it historical or mythical? 2. Was 
 the Deluge partial or universal? 
 
 1. Many of the Germans, and according 
 to Davidson ‘all good critics” have aban- 
 doned the historical character of the narra- 
 tive. ‘The physical difficulties are supposed 
 to be insuperable. ‘The whole therefore is 
 said to be ‘mythical, embodying the old 
 Hebrew belief in the retributive character of 
 sin” (Davidson, ‘Introd. to O. T.’ Vol. 1. p. 
 187). How then, it may be asked, does it 
 happen, that so many nations retained a recol- 
 lection of the same great event? ‘The races 
 of mankind have been divided by modern 
 Ethnologists into Semitic, Aryan (Iranian or 
 Indo-European) and Turanian. It will be 
 found, that in all these races there are tradi- 
 tions of a flood, which destroyed all mankind 
 except one family. The Semitic account is 
 to be found in the Bible and in the Chaldzan 
 tradition, which is the nearest to that of the 
 Bible, and which comes down to us in the 
 fragments of Berosus preserved by Josephus 
 and Eusebius. According to that tradition, 
 Sisuthrus or Xisuthrus being warned of a flood 
 by the god Cronus, built a vessel and took 
 into it his relatives and near friends, and all 
 kinds of birds and quadrupeds. ‘The vessel 
 was five stadia in length and two in breadth. 
 When the flood had abated, he sent out birds, 
 which first of all returned to him, but, after 
 
 creatures, and how He is moved not to curse, 
 but to pity and to bless those who turn to 
 Him with -penitent hearts, and faith in that 
 great Sacrifice, of which Noah’s offering was 
 a type and a prophecy. 
 
 22. seedtime and harvest| ‘The Deluge 
 had confounded earth and sea. ‘There reign- 
 ed as it were one long winter, almost one un- 
 broken night, over the whole world. But 
 thenceforth the Lord decreed, that seasons 
 should follow in their course, the season of 
 sowing and the season of reaping, the cold 
 and the heat, the summer and the winter, the 
 day and the night. 
 
 THE DELUGE, 
 
 (8) Explicable only on 
 Was it universal? (a) How to 
 probably to mankind. (y) Geological diffi- 
 
 the second trial, returned no more. Judging 
 then that the flood was abated, he took out 
 some of the planks of the vessel, and found 
 that it had stranded on the side of a moun- 
 tain. Whereupon he and all his left the ship, 
 and offered sacrifice to the gods. ‘The place 
 of landing was in Armenia; where part of the 
 vessel still remained, from which the people 
 of the country scraped off the bitumen and 
 made amulets (see Cory’s ‘Ancient Fragm.’ 
 Pp. 22, 29, 1st Edition). Ofthe Aryan tradi- 
 tions, first, the Greek is to be found in the well 
 known classical legend of the floods of Ogyges 
 and Deucalion. Pindar (‘Ol.’ 1x. 37), first 
 mentions the flood of Deucalion. The ac- 
 count is given at length by Ovid; by whom 
 the reason assigned is the general prevalence 
 of violence and wickedness (‘ Metam.’ I. 240, 
 &c.). Apollodorus (Lib. 1.) ascribes the de- 
 luge of Deucalion to the determination of 
 Jupiter to destroy the men of the brazen age. 
 And Lucian (‘De Syra Dea’) speaks of it as 
 having destroyed the whole human race. ‘The 
 Persian tradition may be that embodied in 
 the Koran, though there probably incorpo- 
 rated with the Scriptural narrative. ‘The 
 Hindoo tradition represents Manu as warned 
 by a great fish to build a ship, that he might 
 be preserved dvring an impending deluge. 
 The ship was saved by being lashed on to the 
 horn of the fish, and was ultimately landed on 
 a northern mountain. (See the tradition at 
 
 length, Hardwick, ‘Christ and other Masters,’ 
 
SENS Tome Pak, 
 
 p. ii. ch. 1. § 3.) The Phrygian story of 
 Annakos (supposed to be Enoch) who foretold 
 the Deluge, is singularly confirmed by a medal 
 struck at Apamea (called Apamea Kibotus, i.e. 
 Apamea, the Ark) in the reign of Septimius 
 Severus, on which is depicted an ark or chest 
 floating on the waters. ‘Two people are seen 
 within it and two going out of it. On the 
 top of the ark a bird perches, and another 
 flies towards it with a branch between its 
 feet, on the vessel; in some specimens of this 
 coin, are the letters NQ. It can hardly be 
 doubted, however, that this coin, and the tra- 
 dition connected with it, come somewhat 
 directly from Hebrew sources. The third 
 division of the Human Race, the Turanian, 
 has also everywhere traditions of the Deluge. 
 In China, Fa-he, the reputed founder of 
 Chinese civilization, is represented as escap- 
 ing from the waters of a deluge, and he 
 reappears as the first man at the produc- 
 tion of a renovated world, attended by his 
 wife, three sons and three daughters (Hard- 
 wick, Part 111. p. 16). ‘The inhabitants of 
 the Polynesian Islands, who are probably of 
 Malay origin, especially the Figi islanders, 
 have distinct accounts of a deluge, in which a 
 family, eight in number, was saved in a 
 canoe (Hardwick, 111. 185). Similar tradi-, 
 tions prevailed throughout the continent of 
 America, the aboriginal inhabitants of which 
 are now generally believed to be all of one 
 stock, and by their physical and linguistic 
 peculiarities are by the greatest ethnologists 
 identified with the Turanian races of Asia. 
 (See Bunsen, ‘ Philos. of Univ. Hist.’ Vol. 11. 
 p. 112.) In South America, the inhabitants 
 of Mexico had paintings representing the De- 
 luge, a man and his wife in a bark or on a 
 raft, a mountain rising above the waters, and 
 birds, the dove, the vulture, &c. taking part 
 in the scene. In North America, the Chero- 
 kee Indians had a legend of all men destroyed 
 by a deluge, except one family saved in a 
 boat, to the building of which they had been 
 incited by a mysterious dog, which recalls the 
 Indian fable of the friendly fish (see Hard- 
 wick, Part 111. pp. 161—164). 
 
 Thus among the more civilized countries 
 of Europe, and in well nigh every portion of 
 Asia and America, in every different race of 
 mankind, we find traditionary accounts of 
 this great catastrophe, and of the miraculous 
 deliverance of a single family. ‘The mythical 
 interpreters insist, that every nation had its 
 mythic age, its mythic traditions, and that as 
 we discover the same myth of a deluge in all 
 other nations, we naturally conclude that 
 the Hebrew narrative is in like manner my- 
 thical. But how can it be explained, that in 
 all parts of the world, people have stumbled 
 on the same myth? What is there, apart 
 from tradition, that so commends the fable of 
 a Deluge and of the saving of one household 
 to the imagination and invention of mankind? 
 
 The existence of cosmogonies, more or less 
 alike, may be easily conceived of. But, that 
 in all parts of the world, among races the 
 most remote and dissimilar, there should pre- 
 vail a belief, that, after man was created on 
 the earth, all men but one family, were de- 
 stroyed by a Deluge, is intelligible only on 
 the supposition, that some such event ac- 
 tually did occur; an event simply, graphically 
 and accurately related in the Book of Genesis, 
 but variously distorted and disguised in the 
 legends of the heathen world. An universal 
 belief, not springing directly from some in- 
 stinctive principle in our nature, can with 
 reason only be ascribed to tradition of an 
 historical fact. ‘The only other explanation 
 suggested is utterly impossible, viz. that in 
 many parts of the world among the more 
 civilized and the most barbarous alike, re- 
 mains of marine animals found beneath the 
 Earth’s surface had suggested the same be- 
 lief, viz. that there must have been an univer- 
 sal Flood. Even supposing this possible, how 
 does this account for the similarity of the 
 tradition not generally only, but in minute 
 particulars in the remotest parts of the in- 
 habited world? 
 
 2. ‘The second question, Was the Deluge 
 Universal? has long divided those who be- 
 lieve that it was historically true, and that it is 
 correctly related by Moses. ‘The most literal 
 interpretation of the language, especially of 
 the words, Gen. vii. 19, ‘‘all the high hills 
 that were under the whole heaven, were 
 covered,” would lead to the conviction that 
 it must have been universal. Yet it is cer- 
 tain, that many, who accept implicitly the 
 historical truth of the narrative, believe the 
 inundation to have been partial. Of such 
 we may distinguish two classes of writers, 
 1st those who think that all the then living 
 race of man was destroyed; but that those 
 regions of the earth not then inhabited by 
 man were unaffected by the Flood: and, 
 those who believe that the Flood swept 
 away only that portion of mankind with 
 which the Sacred narrative is chiefly’ con- 
 cerned; and which had become corrupted 
 and vitiated by the promiscuous marriages 
 mentioned in ch. vi. I, 2. 
 
 In order to place ourselves in a fair posi- 
 tion for judging of these questions, it may be 
 well to consider the nature of the narrative, 
 and the common use of language among the 
 Hebrews. And if we do so carefully, we 
 shall surely be led to conclude, that the 
 Deluge is described as from the point of 
 view of an eye-witness. It has been so much 
 our wont to look on all the early portions of 
 Genesis as a direct revelation from God to 
 Moses, that we rather consider the picture to 
 be drawn, if we may speak so, as from the 
 point of view of the Omnipotent. Yet, even 
 if we are right in esteeming all as a simply 
 direct revelation, it may be, that the reve- 
 
 75 
 
GENESIS.” Vala 
 
 lation was given in prophetic vision, and that 
 Moses wrote, not merely what he had heard, 
 but also, and rather, what he had seen. But 
 we may remember too, that the custom of 
 Scripture is to refer historical records to the 
 evidence of eye-witnesses. ‘This is very much 
 the case in the New Testament. The Apostles 
 and Evangelists constantly claim to have been 
 present at the scenes which they relate (see 
 especially Luke i. 1,2; Joh. xix. 35, xxi. 24; 
 Acts i. 3; 1 Cor. xv. 3-—8; 2Pet.i.16; x Joh. 
 i.1); and they relate them as those scenes ap- 
 peared to them. ‘The baptism of Jesus, the 
 transfiguration, the walking on the waters, the 
 multiplying the loaves and fishes, the Cruci- 
 fixion, the Resurrection, the Ascension, the 
 tongues of fire at Pentecost, are all simply 
 painted as they who were present saw and con- 
 ceived of them. And this is equally true in the 
 Old Testament. ‘Take for instance the much 
 debated miracle of the sun and the moon 
 standing still at the command of Joshua. 
 The phenomenon is related just as the con- 
 tending armies witnessed it. It is not re- 
 ferred to its natural causes, whatever they 
 may have been. That merely is related 
 which actually appeared. At Joshua’s com- 
 mand, and of course by Divine intervention, 
 the Sun and the Moon, which would natu- 
 rally have seemed to describe an arc in the 
 heavens and to descend into the west, then, 
 on the contrary, seemed to stand still in the 
 midst of heaven. Now just so is the Deluge 
 described in Genesis. It is pictured, as it 
 would have presented itself to the eyes of 
 Noah and his family. Moreover, on the 
 principle just mentioned, it is in the highest 
 degree probable, that the description is really 
 that which was given by one of such eye- 
 witnesses. It would have been very strange 
 if no such description had been given and 
 preserved. Shem would almost certainly 
 have related it, over and over again, to his 
 children and grand-children. ‘They would 
 have treasured it up in their memories and 
 have handed it on. As has been so notori- 
 ously the case among later nations (see Max 
 Miiller’s ‘Sans. Lit.’ p. 500) the very words 
 of the original narrative would be carefully 
 recorded from father to son, whether in 
 writing or by oral tradition; and so, in all 
 probability, we have in Genesis the very 
 syllables in which the Patriarch Shem de- 
 scribed to the ancestors of Abraham that 
 which he himself had seen, and in which he 
 had borne so great part. ‘The Divine autho- 
 rity of the narrative would be no more 
 affected by this, than the authority of the 
 Gospel of St Mark is affected by the pro- 
 bable fact that St Mark relates that which 
 St Peter communicated to him as the result 
 of his own ocular and aural experience. 
 Let us then view it thus. One of the eight 
 human beings saved in the ark relates all that 
 he saw. He mentions first God’s warning to 
 
 Noah and denunciation of judgment on man- 
 kind. He describes the building and the 
 proportions of the ark. He narrates the 40 
 days of rain and the swelling of the rivers 
 and of the ocean, in the words which most 
 forcibly describe that great catastrophe (Gen. 
 vii. 11). He then describes how the waters 
 prevailed, till the ark was raised up and 
 floated over them (v. 18). At length, not 
 only did the ark float, but the highest hills 
 disappeared (v. 19); nothing was visible 
 under the whole vault of heaven, but sea and 
 air. ‘The very words are ‘ All the high hills 
 under the whole heaven were covered.” 
 Where the ark was at this time, or where 
 Noah and his family had been dwelling 
 before, we cannot tell. The country may 
 have been mountainous, and so, in order to 
 hide the hills from view, the waters must 
 have been very deep, or it may have been a 
 plain country, as many think the region 
 round about Babylon, with few hills in sight 
 and those not of great altitude; in which 
 case but a moderate depth of water would 
 have sufficed to cover all the highest hills 
 under the whole canopy of heaven. ‘The 
 inhabitants of the ark probably tried the 
 depth of the Deluge by a plumb line, an 
 
 invention surely not unknown to those who 
 
 had acquired the arts of working in brass and 
 iron (ch, iv. 22), and they found a depth of 
 15 cubits. Then all flesh, all that was on 
 the dry land, died. And, as the gathering of 
 the waters is thus described, so in ch. viii. 
 the subsidence is given in the same simple 
 graphic style. At length, on a specified day, 
 the ark rests. It is found that it had strand- 
 ed near to some of the hills in a generally 
 plain country, perhaps to the south of Arme- 
 nia, perhaps in the north of Palestine, per- 
 haps somewhere in Persia, or in India or 
 elsewhere. ‘The waters continually decrease, 
 it may be the vapours also clear off; and at 
 length the summits of the surrounding hills 
 become visible, though the plain country still 
 is flooded. Noah then sends out the Raven. 
 It goes to and fro, but returns no more to 
 the ark. No account is given of its wander- 
 ings; what appears to Noah and his family 
 is all that we learn. So too of the Dove. 
 It goes forth and, finding no rest, comes back 
 again. Once more it is sent out. Whither 
 it goes no one can tell, all that appears is, 
 that it has found dry land. It brings back 
 an olive leaf in its beak; and Noah judges 
 that the waters were abated. From first to 
 last the description is just that which Shem 
 or Noah would have given of all that he had 
 himself seen. 
 
 If this be the true explanation of the 
 narrative, we may then more readily see 
 how the question of the universality of the 
 Deluge stands. The words used may certain- 
 ly mean that the Deluge was universal, that it 
 overwhelmed, not only all the inhabited parts 
 
GENE STIS2 Vir. 
 
 of Asia, but also Europe, Africa, and America, 
 Australia, New Zealand, and Oceanica; most, 
 if not all, of which Islands and Continents 
 were probably then without human inhabit- 
 ants. Yet, if only the inhabited world was 
 inundated, and all its inhabitants destroyed; 
 the effect would have been the same to Noah, 
 and would, most likely, have been described 
 in the same words. The purpose of God 
 was to sweep away the sinful race of Adam. 
 ‘That purpose would have been effected by a 
 Deluge, which covered the whole of that 
 portion of the globe, which may be called 
 the cradle of the human race. The words of 
 the narrative are perhaps no stronger than 
 would have been naturally used to describe 
 such a catastrophe. ‘The most striking is 
 the passage, “All the high hills under the 
 whole heaven,” ch. vii. 19. But this is no 
 more than such expressions as, ‘‘I begin to 
 put the dread of thee upon the nations that 
 are under the whole heaven,” Deut. i. 25: 
 ‘all countries came into Egypt to 4ox h to 
 buy corn en. X ee he ‘ = thy 
 Go “Tiveth, there is no nation or kingdom 
 whither my lord hath not sent to seek thee, 
 &e.,” 1 Kings xviii. ro. When the ancients 
 epeais of the whole world, they mean at most 
 the whole world as known tothe ancients. 
 When they speak of the whole heaven, they 
 mean the whole visible canopy or expanse of 
 the sky; and so, when they speak of the earth, 
 the land, the dry ground, they mean. at times 
 yery limited portions indeed of the earth's 
 
 > strictest interpretation of the 
 
 surface. ‘The 
 record, according to the habit of speech 
 among Semitic nations, will allow us to un- 
 derstand that a Deluge prevailed, extensive 
 enough to destroy all the living race of man, 
 and to cover with water the whole visible face 
 of nature. It is another question, whether 
 we may admit, that any portion of the human 
 race, except the eight persons miraculously 
 preserved, can have escaped. Some suppose 
 the descendants of Cain to have peopled 
 China, and not to have been involved in the 
 Deluge, which, in their belief, was sent on 
 purpose to destroy those apostate and dege- 
 nerate Sethites, who had defiled the chosen 
 race by intermarrying with unbelievers. 
 Others think that the Nephilim of Numb. 
 xill. 33 were descendants of the Nephilim of 
 Gen. vi. 4, who must therefore have survived 
 the Deluge. Others again, as the authors 
 of ‘The Genesis of the Earth and Man,’ 
 and of ‘Adam and the Adamites,’ suppose 
 that there was a pre-Adamite race of men, 
 and that the history Tn CSHCSIS TSTSESS™ only 
 the fortunes of the Adamites, having no re- 
 ference to the rest. Without pronouncing 
 too hastily on any fair inference from the 
 words of Scripture, we may reasonably say, 
 that their most natural interpretation is, that 
 the whole race of man had become grievously 
 corrupted, since the faithful had intermingled 
 
 with the ungodly; that the inhabited world 
 was consequently filled with violence, and 
 that God had decreed to destroy all mankind, 
 except one single family; that therefore all 
 that portion of the earth, perhaps as yet a 
 very small portion, into which mankind had 
 spread, was overwhelmed by water. ‘The ark 
 was ordained to save the one faithful family ; 
 and lest that family, on the subsidence of the 
 waters, should find the whole country round 
 them a desert, a pair of all the beasts of the land 
 and of the fowls of the air were preserved along 
 with them, and along with them went forth to 
 replenish the now desolated continent. ‘The 
 words of Scripture (confirmed as they are by 
 an universal tradition), appear, at least, to 
 mean as much as this. ‘They do not neces- 
 sarily mean more. 
 
 The geological objections to the history of 
 the Deluge are chiefly such as the discovery 
 of loose scoriz on the tops of the extinct vol- 
 canoes of Auvergne and Languedoc, the im- 
 possibility of the waters extending to the 
 height of 15 cubits above the mountains, and 
 the permanent distribution of the animal king- 
 dom over the different parts of the world. 
 
 It is said the loose scoriz on the mountains 
 of Auvergne and Languedoc must have been 
 swept away by an universal flood. It is, 
 however, quite conceivable, even if the Deluge 
 extended to those regions and to the tops of 
 those hills, that the gradual rise and subsi- 
 dence of the waters may have left there re- 
 mains of volcanic action, which are not so 
 light as has been asserted, almost untouched. 
 ‘The diheuity 1a conceiving of the waters 
 uising.1 cubits above the highest mountains 
 is a difficulty in the mind of the objector, not 
 
 in_ the_text_of Scripture, which _ nowhere 
 Spea <s of such a rise. (See the earlier part of 
 this note.) ‘The possibility of vegetation sur- 
 viving has been considered in the note on ch. 
 vill. rm. The most serious difficulty in con- 
 ceiving of a Flood universal (not only.to the 
 world inhabited by man, but to the whole 
 surface of the globe) is in the history of the 
 distribution of the animal kingdom. For ex- 
 ample, the animals now living in South 
 America and in New Zealand are of the same 
 type as the fossil animals which lived and died 
 there before the creation of man. Is it con- 
 ceivable that all should have been gathered 
 together from their original habitats into 
 the ark of Noah and have been afterwards 
 redistributed to their respective homes? ‘The 
 difficulty, however, vanishes entirely, if the 
 sacred narrative relates only a submersion of 
 the human race and of its then dwelling-place, 
 a sense of that narrative, which exact criti- 
 cism shews to be possible, perhaps even the 
 most probable, irrespective of all questions of 
 natural science. The cavils against the single} 
 window, the proportions of the ark, &c, 
 have been considered in their respective places. 
 The peculiar unfairness of the objection 
 
 77 
 
78 
 
 purged is to be found, not so much in the ob- 
 _jections themselves, as in the insisting at the 
 “same time on an interpretation of the Scrip- 
 ‘ture narrative, on principles which would not 
 be applied to any other history whatever. 
 Not only are we required to expound ancient 
 and Eastern phraseology with the cold exact- 
 »ness applicable only to the tongues of Nor- 
 »thern Europe, but moreover to adhere to all 
 | the interpretations of past uncritical ages, to 
 _ believe that there was but a single window in 
 _the ark, that the ark stranded on the top of a 
 | mountain, within sight of which it very pro- 
 ‘bably never sailed, that the waters of the 
 Flood rose three, or even five miles above the 
 sea level, and other prodigies, which the sa- 
 cred text, even in its most natural signifi- 
 ' cance, nowhere either asserts or implies. 
 
 If it be inquired, why it pleased God to 
 save man and beast in a huge vessel, instead 
 of leaving them a refuge on high hills or in 
 some other sanctuary, we perhaps inquire in 
 
 GENESTSs Lt 
 
 [v. I—3, 
 
 vain. Yet surely we can see, that the great 
 moral lesson and the great spiritual truths 
 exhibited in the Deluge and the ark were 
 well worth a signal departure from the com- 
 mon course of nature and Providence. The 
 judgment was far more marked, the deli- 
 verance far more manifestly Divine, than they 
 would have been, if hills or trees or caves 
 had been the shelter provided for those to be 
 saved. ‘The great prophetic forepicturing of 
 salvation from a flood of sin by Christ and 
 in the Church of Christ would have lost all 
 its beauty and symmetry, if mere earthly 
 refuges had been sufficient for deliverance. 
 As it is, the history of Noah, next after the. 
 history of Christ, is that which perhaps most 
 forcibly arrests our thoughts, impresses our 
 consciences and yet revives our hopes. It 
 was a judgment signally executed at the 
 time. It is a lesson deeply instructive for all 
 time. 
 
 CHAPTER SIX, 
 
 1 God blesseth Noah. 4. Blood and murder are 
 Jorbidden. 8 God’s covenant, 13 signified by 
 the rainbow. 18 Noah replenisheth the world, 
 
 20 planteth a vineyard, 21 is drunken, and 
 
 mocked of his son, 25 curseth Canaan, 26 bless- 
 eth Shem, 27 prayeth for Fapheth, 29 and dieth. 
 
 ND God blessed Noah and his 
 
 2 And the fear of you and the 
 dread of you shall be upon every beast 
 of the earth, and upon every fowl] of 
 the air, upon all that moveth upon the — 
 earth, and upon all the fishes of the 
 sea; into your hand are they delivered. 
 
 Every moving thing that liveth 
 
 shall be meat for you; even as the 
 
 sons, and said unto them, *Be 
 ’sreen herb have I given you all ’chapr 
 x 29. 
 
 fruitful, and multiply, and replenish 
 
 @ chap. 1. 
 
 28. 
 & 8. 17. 
 
 the earth. 
 
 CuHap.1X.1. And God blessed Noah, &c.] 
 Noah, now become the second head of the 
 human farhily, receives a blessing, the former 
 part of which is but a repetition of the bless- 
 ing first pronounced on Adam, ch. i. 28. 
 ‘The sin of man had frustrated the intent 
 of the first blessing. ‘The earth had been 
 filled with licentiousness and violence, fatal 
 to the increase of mankind, and at length 
 bringing down a judgment, which swept all 
 but one family away. Now all begins anew; 
 and God repeats the promise of fecundity, 
 which sin had made of none effect. 
 
 2. the fear of you and the dread of you] 
 The small remnant of mankind just rescued 
 from the Deluge might have perished from 
 the attacks of wild beasts, which had pro- 
 bably been young and tame in the ark, but 
 were now adult or adolescent and returning 
 to their own wild natures. The assurance 
 given in this verse was therefore a very need- 
 ful comfort to Noah and his family. 
 
 3. Every moving thing that liveth shall 
 be meat for you] In the primal blessing (ch. 
 l. 28, 29, 30) there had been mention of 
 
 things. 
 
 man’s supremacy and power over the inferior 
 animals. It has been a question whether 
 there had been a permission of animal food 
 or not. ‘The almost universal opinion of the 
 ancients was that only vegetable food was 
 then permitted; and if we remember that 
 most probably the early race of men lived 
 in a warm and genial climate, and that even 
 now some of the Eastern nations are con- 
 tented and healthy upon a vegetable diet, 
 we shall be the more disposed to acquiesce 
 in an interpretation which seems to do less 
 violence to the text. It cannot, however, 
 be said that there was from the first a 
 prohibition of animal food. From very early 
 times we find sheep and cattle kept at least 
 for milk and wool, and slain for sacrifice, 
 ch. iv. 2, 20. Whether then it had been 
 conceded or not from the first; it is likely 
 that those who fed and sacrificed sheep, like 
 Abel, who kept cattle, like Jabal, or who 
 handled instruments of bronze and iron, like 
 Tubal Cain, would in the course of time 
 have learned the use of animal food. If so, 
 we may consider the words of this. verse as 
 a concession to the infirmities or the neces- 
 sities of mankind, coupled with restrictions, 
 
Vv. ‘4—I0.] 
 
 lev.17. 4 ©But flesh with the life thereof, 
 \* which is the blood thereof, shall ye 
 not eat. 
 
 5 And surely your blood of your 
 lives will I require; at the hand of 
 every beast will I require it, and at 
 the hand of man; at the hand of 
 every man’s brother will I require the 
 
 2 Matt. 26, life of man. 
 Be as 6 2Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, 
 
 10. 
 ¢ chap. 1. | 
 27- 
 
 _ practices of the Antediluvians. 
 
 by man shall his blood be shed: ¢ for 
 
 in the image of God made he man. 
 
 which may have been called for by the savage 
 
 4. flesh with the life thereof| Rashi and 
 some other Jewish commentators understand 
 a prohibition of the practice of eating flesh 
 cut from the living animal, and so Luther 
 translated, ‘“‘the flesh which yet lives in its 
 blood.” ‘The monstrous wickedness of the 
 Antediluvians, by which the earth was filled 
 with violence, may have taken this form 
 among others; and these words without doubt 
 condemn by implication all such fiendish 
 cruelty. They prohibit also the revolting 
 custom of eating raw flesh; for civilization 
 is ever to be a handmaid to religion, But 
 over and above all this, there is reference to 
 that shedding of blood, or pouring out of 
 life, which formed so great a part of typical 
 sacrifice, and which had its full significance 
 in that pouring out of the soul unto death, 
 which won for man the resurrection to eter- 
 nal life. We need not look for any scientific 
 explanation of the connection between life 
 and blood here, or in the subsequent legal 
 enactments (e.g. Lev. iii. 17, Vil. 26, Xvil. 10; 
 r Sam. xiv. 32; Ez. xxxiii. 25). ‘The ancients 
 no doubt yenerally believed the blood to be 
 the seat of the life; but it is also literally 
 true, that the shedding of blood is equivalent 
 to the destruction of life; and so in these 
 early injunctions the God of mercy taught 
 the value not only of human, but of all 
 animal being, and along with the forbidding 
 of manslaughter forbade wanton cruelty and 
 indifference to the sufferings of His brute 
 creatures, 
 
 5. And surely your blood of your lives will 
 I require, &c.] ‘Vhere have been many pro- 
 posed translations of this verse, The A.V., 
 which accords with the most important an- 
 cient versions, no doubt gives the true mean- 
 ing. ‘The blood of your lives” probably 
 signifies ‘‘ your life blood.” Under the law 
 the ox that gored was to be killed (Ex.xxr. 
 28), which seems a comment on this passage. 
 In Ps. ix. 12 God is said to be the requirer 
 of blood, a phrase identical with that made 
 use of here. 
 
 GENE a Mosely. 
 
 7 And you, be-ye fruitful, and 
 multiply; bring forth abundantly in 
 the earth, and multiply therein. 
 
 8 4 And God spake unto Noah, 
 and to his sons with him, saying, 
 
 g And I, behold, I establish my 
 covenant with you, and with your 
 seed after you; 
 
 10 And with every living creature 
 that zs with you, of the fowl, of 
 the cattle, and of every beast of the 
 earth with you; from all that go 
 
 6. Whoso sheddeth man’s hlood| Here the 
 
 manner in which God will require the blood 
 of the murdered man is specified. ‘There 
 shall be a legal retribution, life for life. 
 
 for in the image of God made he man] 
 The slaughter of brute animals was per- 
 mitted, though wanton cruelty towards them 
 was forbidden; but man was made in the 
 image of God, and to destroy man’s life has 
 in it the sin of sacrilege. Moreover, the 
 image of God implies the existence of a per- 
 sonal, moral, and therefore, in the creature, 
 a responsible will. ‘Though the holiness, 
 which was part of the likeness, was lost in 
 the fall, still the personality and the moral 
 being remained. ‘To destroy the life of such 
 an one is therefore to cut short his time of 
 probation, to abridge his day of grace, to 
 step in between him and his moral Governor, 
 to frustrate, as far as may be, God’s purposes 
 of love and mercy to his soul. Hence the 
 sin of murder is the greatest wrong which 
 man can do to his brother man; perhaps also 
 the greatest insult which man can offer to 
 Him who is the loving Father of all men. 
 The Jews held that there were seven pre- 
 cepts given to Noah, which were binding on 
 all mankind, to be observed by proselytes of 
 the gate and by pious Gentiles, viz. abstinence 
 from murder, from eating the flesh of living 
 animals, from blasphemy, idolatry, incest, 
 theft, and the submission to constituted au- 
 thority; the first two and the last are ex- 
 pressly enjoined in the words recorded in 
 this chapter, the other four result from the 
 dictates of natural religion. 
 
 9. I establish my covenant with you, and 
 with your seed after you| A new covenant is 
 now made with all the human beings rescued 
 from the flood, and through them even with 
 the beasts of the field, that there should not 
 again be a flood to destroy all flesh. ‘This, 
 perhaps, more than any other part of the 
 history, seems to prove that the Deluge ex- 
 tended at least to the destruction of all the 
 then living race of man. 
 
 10. from all that go out of the ark, to 
 every beast of the earth] An idiomatic ex- 
 
80 
 
 J Isai. 54. 
 9. 
 
 € Ecclus, 
 
 Ags TT, Ds 
 
 GENESIS, IX. 
 
 out of the ark, to every beast of the 
 earth. 
 
 11 And/JI will establish my cove- 
 nant with you; neither shall all flesh 
 be cut off any more by the waters of 
 a flood; neither shall there any more 
 be a flood to destroy the earth. 
 
 12 And God said, This zs the 
 token of the covenant which I make 
 between me and you and every liv- 
 ing creature that zs with you, for per- 
 petual generations : 
 
 13 I do set my bow in the cloud, 
 
 and it shall be for a token of a cove- 
 nant between me and the earth. 
 
 14 £And it shall come to pass, 
 when I bring a cloud over the earth, 
 that the bow shall be seen in the 
 cloud: 
 
 15 And I will remember my cove- 
 nant, which zs between me and you 
 and every living creature of all flesh ; 
 and the waters shall no more become 
 a flood to destroy all flesh. 
 
 pression, signifying that the covenant shall 
 extend not only to those that go out of the 
 ark, but also to every beast of the earth. 
 Not only those preserved in the ark, but all 
 other animals are to be interested in this pro- 
 mise. From which we can hardly fail to 
 infer that the destruction of the lower animals 
 was confined to a certain district, and not 
 general throughout the earth. 
 
 18. I do set my bow in the cloud] Lit. 
 I have set My bow. ‘The covenant was 
 an universal covenant; the sign of the cove- 
 nant was therefore to be one visible to all 
 nations, and intelligible to all minds. It 
 appears at first sight as if the words of the 
 sacred record implied that this was the first 
 rainbow ever seen on earth. But it would 
 be doing no violence to the text to believe, 
 that the rainbow had been already a familiar 
 sight, but that it was newly constituted the 
 sign or token of a Covenant, just as after- 
 wards the familiar rite of baptism and the 
 customary use of bread and wine were by 
 our Blessed Lord ordained to be the tokens 
 and pledges of the New Covenant in Christ 
 between His Heavenly Father and every 
 Christian soul. 
 
 20. Noah began to be an husbandman] 
 Husbandry had been much used before the 
 flood; but now there was a new condition of 
 the earth, and all was, as it were, begun 
 again. As an incursion of barbarians has 
 often swept away the civilization of a whole 
 
 [v. 1I—2T. 
 
 16 And the bow shall be in the 
 cloud; and I will look upon it, that 
 I may remember the everlasting cove- 
 nant between God and every living 
 creature of all flesh that zs upon the 
 earth. 
 
 17 And God said unto Noah, 
 This zs the token of the covenant, 
 which I have established between 
 me and all flesh that zs upon the 
 earth. 
 
 18 @ And the sons of Noah, that 
 went forth of the ark, were Shem, 
 and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham zs 
 the father of ‘Canaan. 
 
 19 These -are the three sons 
 Noah: and of them was the whole 
 earth overspread. 
 
 20 And Noah began to de an hus- 
 bandman, and he planted a vine- 
 
 ard: 
 
 21 And he drank of the wine, and 
 was drunken; and he was uncovered 
 within his tent. 
 
 region or continent, so the flood had reduced 
 mankind almost to the simplicity of the days 
 of Adam. Still, without doubt, many of the 
 inventions of the antediluvian race would 
 have been preserved by the family of Noah; 
 and probably among the rest the cultivation 
 of the vine. 
 
 21. he drank of the wine] Many have 
 supposed that Noah was the discoverer of 
 the art of making wine, and even that he 
 was the great planter of the vine. So they 
 have palliated his fault by ascribing it to 
 ignorance of the effects of wine. It is hardly 
 probable that, with all the difficulties of his 
 new position, Noah should have invented fer- 
 mentation. More likely is it, that the inge- 
 nious and intemperate descendants of Cain 
 had long before discovered it. Noah may 
 have been but little used to strong drink, and 
 hence may not have known that it would so 
 soon overcome him; yet we may well follow 
 the wisdom of Calvin, and say, ‘‘ Leaving all 
 this in uncertainty, let us learn from Noah’s 
 intemperance how foul and detestable a vice 
 drunkenness is.” ‘The Holy Scriptures never 
 conceal the sins even of God’s greatest saints, 
 and the sins of saints are sure to meet with 
 chastisement. Noah’s piety is plainly recorded. 
 It is also plainly recorded that he fell into 
 sin, whether partly of ignorance or wholly of 
 infirmity; that sin brought with it shame, 
 and, as is so often found, was the occasion of 
 sin to others, and led on to consequences 
 disastrous to the descendants of all those who 
 
 t Heb. 
 O f Chenaan,. 
 
Vv. 22—27.] 
 
 22, And Ham, the father of Canaan, 
 saw the nakedness of his father, and 
 told his two brethren without. 
 
 23 And Shem and Japheth took a 
 garment, and laid zt upon both their 
 shoulders, and went backward, and 
 covered the nakedness of their father ; 
 and their faces were backward, and 
 they saw not their father’s naked- 
 ness. 
 
 in any degree shared in the guilt of it. Noah 
 sinned, Ham sinned, perhaps, too, Canaan 
 sinned. So there was a heritage of sorrow 
 to the descendants of Noah in the line of 
 Ham, to the descendants of Ham in the line 
 of Canaan. 
 
 22. Ham, the father of Canaan] ‘The 
 great difficulty in this history is that Ham 
 appears to have sinned, and Canaan is curs- 
 ed. Some see in this simply the visiting 
 of the sins of the fathers on their children. 
 But then why only on one of those children ? 
 A propriety has been discovered in the curse 
 on Canaan, as he was Ham’s youngest son, 
 just as Ham was the youngest son of Noah. 
 Yet this is all gratuitous and without autho- 
 rity from the text of Scripture. It has been 
 thought, once more, that Noah’s prophecy ex- 
 tended to all the posterity of Ham, but that 
 only that portion which affected Canaan was 
 preserved by Moses, in order to animate the 
 Israelites in their wars against the Canaanites; 
 others again have conjectured, that in the 
 prophecy of Noah, instead of “cursed be 
 Canaan,” we ought to read, ‘‘cursed be Ham 
 the father of Canaan,” but such conjectures, 
 without authority of MSS. are quite inadmis- 
 sible. The extreme brevity of the narrative 
 renders it impossible to explain it fully. No- 
 thing is said, save only that Ham saw’ his 
 father naked, and then told his brethren. We 
 are even left to infer that he told this scoff- 
 ingly; but for the curse that follows, we 
 might suppose that he had only consulted 
 them as to how best to conceal their father’s 
 shame. Something therefore there plainly is, 
 which requires to be supplied in order ‘fully 
 to clear up the obscurity. Yet this cannot 
 now be discovered. Conjecture only is pos- 
 sible. 
 
 Origen mentions as a tradition among the 
 Jews, that Canaan first saw the shame of his 
 grandfather and told it to his father. In that 
 case, it may have been that the chief sin lay 
 with Canaan, and hence that he especially in- 
 herited the curse. Many commentators have 
 adopted this opinion, and it would certainly 
 solve most of the difficulty. 
 
 24. His younger son] Ham is always 
 named second among the sons of Noah; but 
 VoL, I. 
 
 GTAN E.Stoa eX: 
 
 24 And Noah awoke from his wine, 
 and knew what his younger son had 
 done unto him. 
 
 25 And he said, Cursed de Canaan; 
 a servant of servants shall he be unto 
 his brethren. 
 
 26 And he said, Blessed be the 
 Lorp God of Shem; 
 
 shall be "his servant. 
 
 it has sometimes been thought, that Japheth 
 was the eldest and Ham the youngest, the 
 order being changed for the sake of putting 
 first Shem, who was the progenitor of the 
 chosen seed. Yet many writers of great au- 
 thority, both Jewish and Christian, under- 
 stand by the term here used, ‘‘his younger 
 (lit. little) son,” not his son Ham, but his 
 grandson Canaan. (So Levi Ben Gerson, 
 Abenezra, Theodoret, Procopius, Joseph Sca= 
 liger, &c.). This would correspond with the 
 tradition mentioned by Origen (see last note), 
 that the sin of Ham was shared by Canaan, 
 or perhaps that Canaan was the guilty per- 
 son, his father only not having condemned, 
 but rather joined in his wickedness. 
 
 ‘25. Cursed be Canaan, &c.] In the patri- 
 archal ages, when there was no regular order 
 of priests or prophets, the head of the family 
 was the priest, and these blessings and curses 
 spake they not of themselves, but being high 
 priests they prophesied. Yet we can hardly 
 fail to see also in these histories a lesson, that 
 a parent’s blessing is to be valued, a parent’s 
 curse to be dreaded. 
 
 26. Blessed be the Lorp God of Shem] 
 The prophecy here assumes the form of a 
 thanksgiving to God, from whom all holy 
 desires and good counsels come, and who had 
 put into the heart of Shem to act piously. At 
 the same time, it is clearly implied, that the 
 Lord, JEHOVAH, should be very specially 
 the God of Shem, which was fulfilled in the 
 selection of the descendants of Abraham to 
 be the peculiar people of God. 
 
 Canaan shall be his servant] Noah fore- 
 tells the subjugation of the land of Canaan 
 by the people of Israel, when the Canaanites 
 should ‘beGome servants of the descendants of 
 Shem. 
 
 27. God shall enlarge Japheth| ‘There is 
 a paronomasia on the name Japheth, which 
 probably signifies ‘‘enlarged.” The Hebrew 
 word “ shall enlarge” is, neglecting the vowel 
 points, letter for letter the same as the word 
 Japheth. The prophecy looked forward to 
 the wide territory which was assigned to the 
 descendants of Japheth, reaching from India 
 and Persia in the East to the remotest boun- 
 
 iy 
 
 ande.Ganaano% a 
 
 them. 
 27 God shall 'enlarge Japheth, and STS 
 
82 
 
 GENESIS, IX. X. 
 
 he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; 
 and Canaan shall be his servant. 
 28 © And Noah lived after the 
 flood three hundred and fifty years. 
 29 And all the days of Noah were 
 nine hundred and fifty years: and he 
 died. 
 
 [iabpats: 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 1 The generations of Noah. 2 The sons of Fa- 
 pheth. 6 The sons of Ham. 8 Nimrod the 
 jirst monarch. 21 The sons of Shem. 
 
 OW these are the generations 
 of the sons of Noah, Shem, 
 
 daries of Europe in the West, and now 
 spreading over America and Australia. 
 
 and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem] 
 (1) The Targum of Onkelos, Philo, ‘Theo- 
 doret and some other interpreters, Jewish and 
 Christian, understood He z.e. God, shall dwell 
 among the descendants of Shem.” (2) Many 
 more, (e.g. Calvin, Bochart, Rosenm., ‘Tuch, 
 Del., Reinke, Keil), following the Targum of 
 the Pseudo- Jonathan, consider Japheth to be 
 the subject of the proposition. Jonathan’s para- 
 phrase is ‘‘ The sons of Japheth shall be pro- 
 selyted and dwell in the schools of Shem,” 
 and the majority of Christian interpreters un- 
 derstood the prophecy to be similar to that 
 in Isai. x. 3, 5, ‘‘ Gentiles shall come to thy 
 light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising 
 ...the abundance of the sea shall be converted 
 unto thee, the forces of the Gentiles shall 
 come unto thee.” Nearly all those nations 
 whose history and language shew them to be 
 Japhetic have been converted to a belief in 
 the religion of the God of Shem, which has 
 long been the religion of all Evrope, and 
 which is now making way even among the 
 Aryan races of Asia. (3) It has been sug- 
 gested by some, though with little ground of 
 probability, that instead of ‘tents of Shem,” 
 we should render ‘‘tents of renown,” the taber- 
 nacles of Japheth being spoken of as famous 
 and illustrious. Of the three interpretations, 
 (2) may be pronounced somewhat confidently 
 to be the true. By that the continuity of 
 the whole prophecy is preserved. ‘The first 
 part, v. 25, refers only to the descendants of 
 Ham and Canaan. The second is the blessing 
 on Shem, with a repetition of the condem- 
 nation of Canaan. The third is the blessing 
 on Japheth, concluding also with the condem- 
 nation of Canaan. 
 
 The prophecy then embraces the following 
 particulars: 1. That the world should be 
 divided among the descendants of Noah, but 
 that Japheth should have the largest portion 
 for his inheritance. 2. That the descendants 
 of Shem should preserve the knowledge of the 
 true God, and be specially chosen to be His 
 inheritance and His peculiar people. 3. That 
 the descendants of Japheth should ultimately 
 dwell in the tents of Shem, that is, according 
 to Jewish interpretation, should learn from 
 the descendants of Shem the knowledge of the 
 true God. 4. That Canaan, and perhaps other 
 Hamitic nations, should be depressed and 
 reduced to a condition of servitude. 
 
 How fully all these predictions have been 
 carried out in the history of Asia, Europe 
 and Africa, hardly need be said. 
 
 28. And Noah lived, &c.] ‘These two 
 verses seem the natural conclusion of ch. v. 
 but are disjoined from it in order to insert 
 the history of the life of Noah. 
 
 CHAP. X.1. Now these are the genera- 
 tions] From the history of Noah the sacred. 
 narrative proceeds to the genealogy of the 
 sons of Noah. It is admitted on all hands 
 that there exists no more interesting record, 
 ethnological and geographical, independently 
 of its Scriptural authority. 
 
 The genealogy traces the origin of all na- 
 tions from a single pair. The human race de- 
 scended from Adam had been destroyed by 
 the flood, with the exception of Noah and 
 his family. Though it is quite possible to 
 interpret the language of the sacred narrative 
 consistently with the belief that the Deluge 
 was not universal, it at least appears most 
 probable that the man-inhabited world was 
 submerged. And again, although some have 
 contended that the different races of man are 
 so dissimilar, that they must have descended 
 from different primitive stocks; yet the in- 
 quiries of naturalists and physiologists at pre- 
 sent tend rather to diminish than to increase 
 the number of distinct species, both in the 
 animal and the vegetable world, and so to 
 make it even the more certain that human 
 beings constitute but one species deducible 
 from a single pair. The same anatomical 
 structure, especially of the skull and brain, 
 the same intellectual capacities, though differ- 
 ently developed in different nations, the same 
 general duration of life, the same liability to 
 disease, the same average temperature of the 
 body, the same normal frequency of the pulse, 
 the fruitful intermarriage of all races, and 
 that with no instinctive natural repugnances, 
 are manifest indications of an unity of species 
 (Del.). From the time of Blumenbach (whose 
 book ‘De nature generis humani unitate’ is 
 still a standard work on this subject) down to 
 the present day, the most eminent physiologists 
 agree in considering these and similar argue 
 ments well nigh conclusive in favour of the 
 unity of the human race. (Consult especially 
 Prichard, ‘Phys. Hist. of Mankind;’ Smyth, 
 ‘Unity of Human Race;’ Quatrefages, ‘ L’unité 
 de i’espéce humaine,’and hisreport on ‘Anthro= 
 pologie’). ‘To these physiological considera- 
 
yhron. 
 
 f 
 ig 
 ‘ 
 
 : 
 
 : 
 4 
 
 & 
 
 Te east 
 
 ve 2:| 
 
 Ham, and Japheth: and unto them 
 were sons born after the flood. 
 2 “The sons of Japheth; Gomer, 
 
 tions we may now add the evidence to be de- 
 rived from human language. ‘It was a pro- 
 found saying of William Humboldt, that 
 man is man only by means of speech, but that 
 in order to invent speech, he must be man al- 
 ready” (Lyell, ‘ Antiquity of Man,’ 468). 
 This alone is an argument for the unity of 
 that race which is distinguished from all other 
 animals by the possession of articulate lan- 
 guage. But, moreover, the greatest philolo- 
 gists of the present day seem to be approach- 
 ing the conclusion that the evidence of com- 
 parative grammar, so far as it goes, is in fa- 
 vour of the original unity of human language. 
 ** One of the grandest results of modern com- 
 parative philology has been to shew that all 
 languages belonging to one common stock— 
 
 _and we may say, enlarging this view, all lan- 
 
 guages of the earth—are but scattered indica- 
 
 _tions of that primitive state of human intel- 
 
 lect, and more particularly of the imitative 
 faculty, under the higher excitement of poeti- 
 cal inspiration, in which the language origi- 
 nated, and with which every language remains 
 connected, as well through the physiological 
 unity of the human race, as through the_his- 
 torical unity of the family to which it more 
 especially BAGS (Meyer ap. Bunsen, ‘ Chris- 
 tianity and Mankind,’ Vol. 1. p. 163). So 
 
 writes Dr Meyer: and Prof. Max Miiller 
 ‘says, “‘ These two points Comparative Philo- 
 logy has gained. (1) Nothing necessitates 
 ‘the admission of different independent begin- 
 -nings for the material elements of the Tura- 
 nian, Semitic, and Aryan branches of speech: 
 ‘nay, it is possible even now to point out radi- 
 cals, which, under various changes and dis- 
 “guises, have been current in these three 
 ‘branches ever since their first separation. (2) 
 Nothing necessitates the admission of different 
 beginnings for the formal elements of the Tu- 
 ranian, Semitic, and Aryan branches of speech ; 
 and though it is impossible to derive the 
 Aryan system of grammar from the Semitic, 
 or the Semitic from the Turanian, we can 
 perfectly understand how, either through in- 
 dividual influences, or by the wear and tear 
 of grammar in its own continuous working, 
 the different systems of grammar of Asia and 
 Europe may have been produced” (Max 
 Miiller, Ibid. pp. 479, 480). Once more, al- 
 though it may not be possible simply to as- 
 
 sign all Semitic tongues to the descendants of 
 
 Shem, Aryan to the descendants of Japhet, 
 and Turanian to the descendants of Ham; it 
 is still observable that comparative philology 
 seems to have reduced all languages to three 
 
 distinct stocks, even the rapid degeneracy of 
 
 barbarian dialects not wholly obscuring their 
 relationship to one of these three families, 
 
 SEN TSS PSI: 
 
 and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, 
 and Tubal, and Meshech, and Ti- 
 ras. | 
 
 —_ 
 
 This is the more to be noticed, when we 
 learn that in savage tribes those who speak 
 the same dialect will sometimes, by separa- 
 tion and estrangement, become in the course 
 of a single generation unintelligible to each 
 other. 
 
 Certain rules are to be observed for the 
 clearing up of some difficulties in the gene- 
 alogy of this chapter. 1. Though some no- 
 tice may be taken of the progenitors of all 
 nations, yet naturally those families, more or 
 less connected with the Hebrews, are the 
 longest dwelt upon. 2. Whereas all are said 
 to have settled and dispersed themselves 
 ‘tafter their families in their nations,” it will 
 appear that only the larger division by za- 
 tions is traced in the case of more remote 
 peoples, whereas those related to or border- 
 ing on the Hebrews are traced both according 
 to the wider division of nations, and the 
 narrower of families. 3. Although the first 
 division of the earth is spoken of as made in 
 the time of Peleg, and some families may be 
 traced no farther than up to the time of such 
 division, yet the developement of those more 
 specially treated of is brought down to the 
 time of Moses. 4. For none, however, must 
 we seek a very remote settlement, as the 
 original dispersion could not have extended so 
 far. 5. In some cases the names of nations 
 or tribes appear to be substituted for the 
 names of individuals, such as the Jebusite, the 
 Hivite, the Arkite &c., very probably also such 
 as Kittim, Dodanim, Mizraim &c.; and even 
 perhaps Aram, Canaan and the like. ‘This 
 may be accounted for in more than one way. 
 The purpose of the sacred writer was to 
 trace nations and families, rather than to give 
 a history of individuals, and he therefore 
 speaks of nations known by name to the 
 Israelites as begotten by (.e. descended from) 
 certain patriarchs, in preference to tracing 
 their descent through unknown individuals. 
 Perhaps too individual patriarchs and proge- 
 nitors had become known by tradition to 
 posterity, not by their own original names, 
 but by the name of the place they had settled 
 in, or by the name of the tribe which they 
 had founded and ruled. ‘The origin of 
 names is often very obscure, and it has been 
 common in most rude societies for persons to 
 be called after places or properties. It is 
 quite possible that even the very earliest patri- 
 archs, as, Shem, Ham and Japheth, Canaan 
 and the like, may have been known in after 
 ages by names which adhered to them 
 through events in their history or places 
 where they had fixed themselves. ‘Thus 
 Shem may have been the man of name, the 
 most renowned of Noah’s sons, Ham, the 
 
 F2 
 
 83 » 
 
34 
 
 GENESIS. X. 
 
 3 And the sons of Gomer; Ash- 
 
 man who settled in the warm regions of 
 Africa, Japheth the father of the fair people of 
 Europe, or perhaps the man whose descend- 
 ants spread abroad more widely than the 
 rest. Canaan again may have been the dwell- 
 er in /ow lands, while ram may have derived 
 a title from having chosen the 4igh lands for 
 his home. ‘This theory, if true, would not 
 interfere with the historical character of this 
 Chapter ; especially if we consider that He- 
 brew may not have been the primitive tongue, 
 in which case all these names must either 
 have been translations of the original names, 
 or names by which the bearers had become 
 known to posterity. We have many ex- 
 amples in Scripture of persons changing their 
 names or adopting new names from events 
 in their history, e.g. Abram changing into 
 Abraham; Esau to Edom; Jacob to Israel ; 
 Saul to Paul, &c., &c. ‘The whole number 
 of families noticed in this chapter amounts to 
 70; but it is to be observed that in some 
 cases the descent is traced only to the grand- 
 sons, in other cases to the great grandsons 
 of Noah: in the family of Shem only, the 
 ancestor of the Hebrews, the descent is 
 traced through six generations. 
 
 2. Japheth| It is doubtful whether Ja- 
 pheth was the eldest or the second son of 
 Noah, see in v. 21. He is generally men= 
 tioned last in order, Shem, Ham and Japheth, 
 but from ix. 24, it is generally inferred that 
 Ham was the youngest. In this genealogy he 
 occurs first, the reason being probably this; 
 Shem is reserved to the last that his descent 
 may be traced to a greater length, and Ham 
 last but one, because his descendants were 
 those most closely connected with the de- 
 scendants of Shem. ‘The etymology of the 
 name Japheth should seem from ix. 27 to be 
 from the root Pathah, to extend. But the 
 language in ix. 27, may be only an example 
 of the paronomasia so common in Hebrew 
 poetry; and Gesenius, Knobel and others 
 prefer to derive from Yaphah, to be fair, from 
 the fair complexion of Japheth and his de- 
 scendants. 
 
 Gomer| Josephus (‘ Ant.’ I. 7) says that 
 Gomer was the ancestor of those whom the 
 Greeks called Galatians, who were formerly 
 called Gomarites. The descendants of Gomer 
 have accordingly been generally identified with 
 the Celtic race called in the time of Homer 
 Cimmerii, who are first known as inhabiting 
 the Chersonesus ‘Taurica, which still re- 
 tains the name Crimea. (See Herod. Iv. 12, 
 4s. sch. ‘Prom.’ Vv. 729.) The relation of 
 Gomer to Magog and Madai corresponds 
 with the original juxtaposition of the Cimme- 
 rians to the Scythians and Medes, the Cim- 
 merians dwelling first on the confines of 
 Asia and Europe. Being driven thence by 
 
 [wage 
 kenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah. 
 
 the Scythians in the reign of Cyaxares, they 
 made an irruption into Asia Minor, from 
 which they were driven back again by 
 Alyattes. Their name, which then nearly 
 disappears in Asia, is recognized again in the 
 Cimbri, who occupied the Cimbrian Cher- 
 sonesus and other parts of the North of 
 Europe, and in the great Celtic tribe of 
 Cymry, the ancient inhabitants of Britain 
 and the present inhabitants of Wales. 
 
 Magog] The statement of Josephus (‘ Ant.’ 
 I. 6), that the descendants of Magog were 
 the Scythians is generally accepted as true. 
 In Ezek. xxxvill. 2, 143; Xxxix. 2. 6, we find 
 Magog as the name of a people inhabiting 
 “‘the sides of the North” closely connected 
 with Meshech, the Moschi, and Tubal, the 
 Tibarenes, with a prince named Gog, having 
 horses and armed with bows, which corre- 
 sponds with the local position and military 
 habits of the Scythians. ‘The Scythians, ac- 
 cording to their own traditions, lived first in 
 Asia near the river Araxes, afterwards they 
 possessed the whole country to the ocean and 
 the lake Mzotis, and the rest of the plain to 
 the river Tanais (Diod. Sic. 11. 3). Herodotus 
 (1. 103—106) relates their descent upon 
 Media, and Egypt, till they were surprised 
 and cut off at a feast by Cyaxares. From 
 their intermixture with the Medes, the Sar- 
 matians appear to have arisen, and from them 
 the Russians, See Knobel. 
 
 Madai| ‘The Medes were called Mada 
 by themselves, as appears from the arrow- 
 headed inscriptions, changed in the Semitic 
 to Madai, and by the Greeks to Medoi. 
 They dwelt to the S. and S. W. of the Cas- 
 pian, and coming over to Europe in small 
 parties mingled with the Scythians, whence 
 sprang the Sarmatians. 
 
 Javan| From Javan was “Ionia and the 
 whole Hellenic people” (Jos. ‘ Ant.’ i. 6). 
 Cp. Is. Ixvi. 19, Ezek. xxvii. 13, Daniel viii. 
 21, where Alexander is called king of Javan ; 
 Joel ili. 6, where ‘‘ the sons of the Javanites” 
 are put for the Grecians (vies "Ayaiwv), Zech. 
 ix. 13. Greece is called Jonia in Egyptian 
 hieroglyphics and Yuna in a Cuneiform in- 
 scription at Persepolis (Gesen. s.v.). The 
 Ionians were the most Eastern of the Hel- 
 lenic races, and so were the best known to 
 the Asiatics. ‘The course of migration had 
 evidently been from Ionia to Attica and other 
 parts of Greece. 
 
 Tubal, and Meshech| ‘These names con- 
 stantly occur together; see Ezek. xxvii. 13, 
 XXXii. 26, XXXVliil. 2, 3, XXXIX. I; where we 
 find them joined with the invading army of 
 Gog and Magog, and going with Javan to 
 Tyre to purchase slaves and vessels of brass. 
 Meshech is by Josephus said to be the father 
 
a 
 4 And the sons of Javan; Elishah, 
 
 of the Cappadocians, who had, he tells us, 
 a city called Mazacha, and to Tubal he 
 traces the Iberians who dwelt between the 
 Euxine and the Caspian. Later writers have 
 long identified Meshech with the Moschi, in- 
 habitants of the Moschian mountains between 
 Armenia, Iberia and Colchis. Bochart was 
 the first to identify Tubal with the Tibareni, 
 who dwelt on the Southern shore of the Eux- 
 ine towards the East and near to the Moschi. 
 Knobel considers the Tibareni to be con- 
 peed with the Iberians: Tubal= Tibar = 
 Iber. 
 
 Tiras| Josephus identifies the descendants 
 of Tiras with the Thracians. So Jerome, 
 the Targums, and most modern commenta- 
 tors. The Gete and Daci, north of the 
 Danube, belonged to the Thracian stock. 
 According to Grimm and some other au- 
 thorities, the Getz were the ancestors of the 
 Goths, which would immediately connect the 
 Thracian and Teutonic races together. ‘The 
 chief reason, however, for considering ‘Tiras 
 the ancestor of the Thracians seems to be the 
 similarity of the names. Accordingly other 
 resemblances have been found. ‘Tuch for in- 
 stance is in favour of the Tyrseni or Tyr- 
 rheni. 
 
 3. the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz| There 
 is little to guide us to the identification of 
 Ashkenaz, except the name and the mention 
 of Ashkenaz Jer. li. 27 in company with 
 Ararat and Minni, which makes it probable 
 that the descendants of Ashkenaz dwelt near 
 the Euxine and the Caspian. Bochart sug- 
 gests Phrygia, where were the lake and river 
 Ascanius. ‘The Rabbi Saadias says the Slavi. 
 Targ. of Jonathan gives Adiabene. Some 
 have discovered a resemblance of sound in 
 Scandinavia, and also to Saxon. ‘The modern 
 Jews called Germany Ashkenaz ; and Knobel 
 considers this to be the true interpretation of 
 the name; though etymologically he finds in 
 it the race of Asa or the Asiatics, Ash-genos. 
 These Asa or Asiatics he thinks, dwelt in 
 Asia Minor (comp. 4scania), and after the 
 Trojan war migrated towards Pannonia and 
 thence towards the Rhine. The Scandi- 
 navians traced their origin to Asia, and called 
 the home of their gods Asgard. It has been 
 conjectured by Bochart and others, that the 
 Black sea was called the sea of Ashkenaz, 
 which sounded to the Greeks like Axenos, 
 their original name for it, and which by an 
 euphemism they changed to Euxeinos. 
 
 Riphath| Josephus says Paphlagonia, in 
 which he is followed by Bochart, Le Clerc, 
 &c. Most modern commentators compare 
 the Riphzan mountains, which the ancient 
 geographers (Strab. vil. 3, §1. Plin. ‘H, N.’ 
 Iv. 12. Mela, 1. 19, &c.) place in the remote 
 North. Mela (11. 2) places them East of the 
 
 GAN ES TS os: 
 
 and Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim. 
 
 Tanais. Knobel conjectures that the Celts 
 or Gauls were the descendants of Riphath, 
 and that they first lived near the Carpa- 
 thians, which he identifies with the Montes 
 Riphzi. 
 
 Togarmah| Mentioned again Ez. xxvii, 
 14, Xxxviii. 6. Josephus identifies with the 
 Phrygians, Bochart with the Cappadocians. 
 Michaelis, and after him most moderns, pre- 
 fer the Armenians; so Rosenm., Gesen., 
 Winer, Knobel, &c. ‘The Armenians them- 
 selves traced their origin to Haic the son of 
 Thogoreu or Thorgau (Mos. Choren, I. 4, 
 § 9). Ezekiel (xxvii. 14) attributes to To- 
 garmah great traffic in horses; and Strabo 
 (x1. 13, § 9) speaks of the Armenians as 
 famous for breeding horses, Modern philo- 
 logists consider the Armenian as an Aryan 
 or Indo-European language, which corre- 
 sponds with the descent from Japheth. 
 
 4. And the sons of Javan; Elishah| Eze- 
 kiel (xxvii. 7) mentions the isles of Elishah 
 as those whence the Tyrians obtained their 
 purple and scarlet. Some of the Targums 
 identify with Hellas, in which they are fol- 
 lowed by Michaelis, Rosenm., and others. Jo- 
 sephus (‘ Ant.’ I. 6) identifies with the Kolians, 
 which is the view adopted by Knobel. Bo- 
 chart preferred the Peloponnesus, which was 
 famous for its purple dye, and of which the 
 most important district was called iis, 
 Whichever view he adopted, there is little 
 doubt that the descendants of Elishah in the 
 time of Ezekiel were a maritime people of 
 the Grecian stock. are 
 
 Tarshish| By Josephus identified with Tar- 
 sus in Cilicia; by the LXX. (ls. xxiii. 1, 
 &c.), Theodoret, and others, with Carthage; 
 by Eusebius, who is followed by Bochart and 
 most moderns, with Tartessus in Spain. ‘Tar- 
 shish, from the various notices of it, appears 
 to have been a seaport town towards the 
 West (cp. Ps. Ixxii.; Is. lx. 9); whither the 
 Phcenicians were wont to traffic in large 
 ships, ‘ships of Tarshish” (see 1 K. x. 22, 
 xxii. 48; Ps, xlviii. 7; Is. ii. 16, xxiii. 1, 14, 
 Ix. 9) sailing from the port of Joppa (Jon. i. 
 3, iv. 2). It was a most wealthy and flou- 
 rishing mart, whence came silver, iron, tin, 
 and lead (Ps. Ixxii. 10; Is. Ixvi. 19; Jer. x. 9; 
 Ezek. xxvii. 12, 25). The name Tartessus is 
 identical with ‘Tarshish, the ¢ being constantly 
 substituted by the Syriac for the Hebrew 
 sibilant (cp. Bashan=Batanea, Zor=Tyre, 
 &c.). The Spanish were among the most 
 famous of the Phoenician colonies, and were 
 specially rich in metal (Diod. Sic. v. 35—38; 
 Arrian. 11. 16; Plin. ‘H. N.’ 11. 3; Mela, 11. 
 6, &c.); of which colonies Tartessus was the 
 most illustrious. It appears to have been 
 situated at the mouth of the Guadalquiver 
 (Strabo, III. p. 148). ‘Two passages in Chro- 
 nicles (2 Chron. ix. 21, xx. 36) seem irre- 
 
86 
 
 GENESIS. X. 
 6 @ 2And the sons of Ham; Cush, ¢: Chron. 
 
 5 By these were the isles of the 
 Gentiles divided in their lands; 
 every one after his tongue, after their 
 families, in their nations. 
 
 concilable with this, and induced St Jerome 
 (‘in Jerem.’ x. 9), and after him Bochart and 
 others, to suppose that there must have been 
 another Tarshish in the Indian Ocean, which 
 could be approached by the Red Sea, an opi- 
 nion now generally rejected. Knobel supposes 
 that the original inhabitants of ‘Tarshish were 
 the Tusci, Tyrsenians, or Tyrrhenians, a Pe- 
 lasgic, though not Hellenic race, inhabiting 
 great part of Italy, Corsica, and Sardinia, and 
 that very probably Tartessus in Spain was a 
 colony or offshoot from these people. 
 
 Kittim (or Chittim)| Identified by Jose- 
 phus with Cyprus, in which we meet with 
 the town of Cittium; by Eusebius, and after 
 him by Bochart, with the inhabitants of the 
 part of Italy contiguous to Rome. In 1 
 Maccab. i. r Alexander is said to come from 
 Chittim, and (1 Macc. viii. 5) Perseus is called 
 King of the Kitizans, which induced Michae- 
 lis and others to suppose the Chittim to be 
 the Macedonians. Most modern interpreters 
 seem to acquiesce in the opinion of Josephus, 
 that Cyprus (see Is. xxiii 1, 12) may have 
 been a chief seat of the Chittim, but add 
 that probably their colonies extended to the 
 isles of the Eastern Mediterranean (see Jer. 
 li. 10; Ezek. xxvii. 6). So Gesen., Knobel, 
 Delitz., Kalisch. 
 
 Dodanim] has been compared with Do- 
 dona in Epirus. By Kalisch it is identified 
 with the Daunians. Gesenius suspects Doda- 
 nim to be equivalent (perhaps by contraction) 
 with Dardanim = Dardani or Trojans, an 
 opinion which he confirms by the authority 
 of the Bereschit Rabba on this verse. Knobel 
 conjectures that we have traces of Dodanim 
 both in Dodona (a name which he says pre- 
 vailed through Illyricum and Northern 
 Greece) and also in Dardania and the Dar- 
 dans, There is another reading in x Chr. 
 i. 7, and here also (Gen. x. 4) in the Gr. and 
 Samaritan, viz. Rodanim, Rhodii, the people 
 of Rhodes. 
 
 5. isles of the Gentiles] The word here 
 rendered Is/e very probably meaning originally 
 “habitable region” (Is. xlii. 15), is generally 
 used either of islands or of places on the sea 
 coast. On the whole of this verse see Jos. 
 Mede, Bk. 1. ‘Disc.’ xL1x. L. By the phrase 
 ‘* Isles of the Gentiles” were understood those 
 countries of Europe and Asia Minor to 
 which the inhabitants of Egypt and Palestine 
 had access only by sea. 
 
 6. Ham] It is generally thought that the 
 name means warm, which is to be compared 
 with the Greek Aithiops (Ethiopian), which 
 has a similar significance. The word Kem, 
 
 [v.'5--7. 
 
 and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan. * ®* 
 7 And the sons of Cush; Seba, and © 
 Havilah, and Sabtah, and Raamah, 
 
 the Egyptian name for Egypt, probably the 
 same word as Ham, signities blackness, with 
 perhaps some notion of heat (see Plutarch, 
 ‘De Iside et Osiride,’§ 33). ‘The blackness is 
 now generally admitted to refer to the soil, 
 denoting its colour and fertility. (See Ex- 
 cursus.) In Ps, Ixxviil. 51, Cv. 23, Cvi. 22, 
 Egypt is called the land of Ham, which seems 
 to confirm the belief that Kem (in Greek 
 Chemia) is the same as Ham. ‘The descend- 
 ants of Ham appear to have colonized 
 Babylonia, Southern Arabia, Egypt, Ethiopia, 
 and other portions of Africa. 
 
 Much has been written of late about the 
 Hamitic languages. The frequent mixture 
 of the Hamites with the descendants of Shem 
 makes it very difficult to discern clearly be- 
 tween their tongues. Bunsen considers Cha- 
 mitism to be the most ancient form of Semi- 
 tism, in fact Semitism, before the Hamites 
 and Shemites thoroughly parted off from each 
 other and from their primeval dwelling-place. 
 The ancient Egyptian has a Semitic base with 
 Turanian (negro) infusion, but the Hamitic 
 races have so frequently been conquered, 
 morally and physically, by the descendants 
 of Shem and Japheth, that their original 
 languages have been lost or corrupted by the 
 prevalence of Semitism or Aryanism, 
 
 Cush] The name Cush is generally trans- 
 lated Ethiopia. ‘The Ethiopians at the time 
 of Josephus were called Chuszi, Cushites, 
 and that is still the Syriac name for the 
 Abyssinians. There is, however, good reason 
 to believe, with Bochart, and others, that 
 the first home of the Cushites was Chuzis- 
 tan and the adjoining parts of Southern Asia, 
 from whence they spread in different direc- 
 tions, a main body having crossed the sea 
 and settled in Ethiopia. 
 
 Certainly some of those, who are here 
 mentioned (e.g. Raamah, Sheba, Dedan, vv. 
 7, 8) as the descendants of Cush, established 
 colonies in Asia. Some passages in the Old 
 Testament seem to require that we should 
 place Cush in Asia, as Gen. ii. 13; so also 
 Exod. ii. 16, 21, compared with Num. xii. 1; 
 in the latter of which Zipporah is called a 
 Cushite, whilst in the former she is said to be 
 a daughter of the priest of Midian. ‘This 
 connects Cush with Midian, which was in 
 Arabia Felix, near the Red Sea. Again, in 
 Hab. iii. 7 Cush and Midian appear to be 
 connected. In Job xxviii. 19 we read of ‘the 
 topaz of Cush.” Now, there is no reason 
 to suppose that Ethiopia produced topazes, 
 but Pliny (xxxvul. 8) speaks of an island of 
 Arabia in the Red Sea as famous for this 
 
v. 8.] 
 
 and Sabtechah: and the sons of Raa- 
 mah; Sheba, and Dedan. 
 
 gem, which is also noted by Diodorus (111. 
 39). All this connects Cush with Asia, and 
 seems to prove that the first settlement of the 
 Cushites was in Asia. Their subsequent 
 emigration into Africa, so that one division 
 was on the East and the other on the West 
 of the Gulf of Arabia, may account for 
 the language of Homer, who speaks of the 
 /Ethiopians as divided into two distinct tribes 
 (‘ Od,’ I. 23), a distinction observed by Strabo 
 (‘Geogr.’ I. p. 21), by Pliny (lib. v. c. 8), and 
 by Pomponius Mela (lib. I. cap. 2). 
 
 Mizraim] is undoubtedly Egypt. ‘The ori- 
 gin and meaning of the word has been much 
 debated, but with no certain conclusion. If 
 the singular be the Hebrew Mazor, it should 
 signify a mound or fortified place. Gesenius 
 and others prefer the Arabic Meser, a limit 
 or boundary. ‘The dual form has been sup- 
 posed to indicate Upper and Lower Egypt. 
 It perhaps may be the rendering or transcrip- 
 tion of Mes-ra-n ‘children of Ra,” i.e. of 
 the Sun. The Egyptians elaimed to be sons 
 of Ra. (See Excursus,) It certainly seems as 
 if the name belonged rather to a race or na- 
 tion than to a man; and, therefore, the son 
 of Ham here named is probably designated 
 as the founder or ancestor of the Egyptians 
 or people of Mizraim. 
 
 Phut| The name Phut occurs several times 
 in the Old Testament, and generally in con- 
 nection with the Egyptians and Ethiopians, 
 sometimes with Persia and Lud. See Jer. 
 xlvi.g; Ezek. xxvii. 10, xxx. 5, xxxvill. 5; Nah. 
 iii. 9. The LXX. in Jeremiah and Ezekiel 
 always render Libyans. So Josephus says 
 (‘ Ant.’ 1. 6), that Phut colonized Libya, and 
 that the people were from him called Phut- 
 ites. The Coptic name of Libya is Phaiat 
 
 DAIS. St Jerome speaks of a river of 
 
 Mauritania, and the region round it, as called 
 _ Phut to his time. (‘Tradit. Hebr.’) 
 
 Canaan| The name is thought by some 
 to be derived from the nature of the country 
 in which the descendants of Canaan lived, viz. 
 a flat, depressed region, from the Hebrew root 
 Cana (hiph.) to depress. ‘The fact, that the 
 Canaanites appear to have spoken a Semitic 
 tongue has been alleged as a reason why they 
 should not have been of Hamitic descent. 
 Knobel has well observed, however, that they 
 are said by the ancients to have removed from 
 the Red Sea to the Mediterranean, with 
 which agrees the mythology which brought 
 into relation the Pheenicians’ ancestors Age- 
 nor and Phcenix sometimes with Belus and 
 Babylonia, sometimes with Agyptus and Da- 
 naus (the #thiop), Cepheus and Libya. In 
 the earliest days the Hamites and Shemites 
 
 GE NES iteien. 
 
 8 And Cush begat Nimrod: he be- 
 gan to be a mighty one in the earth. 
 
 were near neighbours; there may have sprung 
 from them a mixed race, which spread to- 
 ward Tyre and Sidon and dispossessed, part- 
 ly also intermingled with, a Semitic race ori- 
 ginally inhabiting the region of Palestine and 
 Pheenicia. As Abraham and his descendants 
 appear to have changed their native Aramean 
 for the Hebrew of Palestine, so very probably 
 the Hamitic Canaanites, long mingled with 
 Shemitic races, acquired the language of the 
 children of Shem. The whole character of 
 the Canaanitish civilization and worship was 
 Hamite, not Semitic. Like the sons of Seth, 
 the sons of Shem lived a nomadic, pastoral 
 life; whilst, with a like resemblance to the de- 
 scendants of Cain, the Hamites were builders 
 of cities and fortresses, and rapidly grew into 
 prosperous, mercantile races, with an ad- 
 vanced, but corrupt civilization. Compare 
 Egypt, Babylon, Nineveh, ‘Tyre, Sidon, and 
 contrast with them the Israelites, Ishmaelites, 
 Arabs, &c. 
 
 7. the sons of Cush; Seba] Seba appears 
 to be the name of a commercial and wealthy 
 region of Ethiopia; see Ps. Ixxii. 10; Is. xliil. 
 3, xlv. 14. In the last passage the Sabeans 
 (Sebaim) are called ‘‘men of stature;” and 
 Herodotus says that the Macrobian Ethio- 
 pians ‘were reported to be the tallest and 
 comeliest of men” (III. 20). According to 
 Josephus (‘ Ant.’ Il. 10), Meroé was anciently 
 called Seba, until Cambyses gave it the name 
 of his sister Meroé. Meroé is described as a 
 strong fortress situated in a most fertile coun- 
 try at the confluence of the rivers Astophus 
 and Astaborus. ‘The ruins of Meroé still re- 
 
 main to the north-east of the Nubian town 
 
 of Shendy. 
 
 Havilah| Hiavilah, the son of Joktan, oc- 
 curs, v. 29, among the descendants of Shem. 
 Some identify the descendants of Havilah 
 the son of Cush with the Avalite on the 
 coast of Africa; whilst others place them in 
 Chawlan of Arabia Felix. ‘There is an inevi- 
 table confusion from the name of a grandson 
 of Ham being the same as that of a descend- 
 ant of Shem. Niebuhr and others have as- 
 serted that there were two Chawlans, and 
 have ascribed one to the Shemite, the other to 
 the Hamite. It seems very possible that the 
 descendants of Havilah the son of Cush in- 
 termingled with the descendants of Havilah 
 the Joktanide, and so ultimately formed but 
 one people, whose dwelling-place was Chaw- 
 lan, the well-known fertile region of Yemen. 
 
 Sabtah| By Gesenius and others, who con- 
 fine the Cushites to Africa, the descendants: 
 of Sabtah are placed on the African shore 
 of the Gulf of Arabia. More commonly, and: 
 more probably,. their home is sought for in 
 
 87 
 
GENE SUS aa. 
 
 9g He was a mighty hunter before 
 the Lorn: wherefore it is said, Even 
 as Nimrod the mighty hunter before 
 the Lorp. 
 
 Hadramaut, a province of Southern Arabia, 
 where Pliny (VI. 32) places the city of Sab- 
 batha or Sabotha. It is said, that to this day 
 in Yemen and Hadramaut there is a dark 
 race of men distinguished from the fairer 
 Arabs, and belonging evidently to a different 
 original stock. (Knobel.) 
 
 Raamah| LXX. Rhegma. The connec- 
 tion of Raamah with Sheba and Dedan, of 
 whom he is here said to be the father (cp. 
 Ezek. xxvii. 22), leaves no doubt, even with 
 those who confine the other Cushites to Ethi- 
 opia, that the settlement of Raamah must be 
 sought for in Southern Arabia, in the neigh- 
 bourhood of Sheba and Dedan. Ptolemy 
 (vI. 7) places Rhégma, and Steph. Byzant. 
 Rhégma on the shore of the Persian Gulf. 
 
 Sabtechah] is by some placed in Ethiopia. 
 Bochart, who is followed by Knobel, places 
 it in Caramania, on the Eastern shore of the 
 Persian Gulf, where the ancients (Ptolem. 
 vi. 8; Steph. Byz. 2) mention Samidace or 
 Samydace. 
 
 Sheba, and Dedan| Sheba occurs again 
 in v. 28 as a son of Joktan, and Sheba and 
 Dedan together, Gen. xxv. 3, as children of 
 Joktan, the son of Abraham and Keturah. 
 This is evidently another example of the in- 
 termingling of the Cushites with the Joktan- 
 ides, and generally of the early descendants 
 of Shem and Ham. In Ezek, xxvii. 15—20 
 we find the Cushite Dedan supplying Tyre 
 with merchandise brought from beyond the 
 sea, while the Shemite Dedan supplies the pro- 
 -duce of flocks. Siieba is known to us as 
 an important and opulent region of Arabia 
 Penx tr eK. x2: SPs. cixxiivtro, pt gers Obi. 
 15, vi. 19; Is. lx. 6; Jer. vi. 20; Ezek. xxvii. 
 223 Joel ili. 8.) The Sabeans are spoken of 
 by Strabo (XVI. p. 777) as a most opulent 
 and powerful people, famous for myrrh, frank- 
 incense, and cinnamon, their chief city being 
 Mariaba, (in Arab. Marib). ‘This was after- 
 wards the famous kingdom of the Himyaritic 
 Arabs, so called probably from the ruling 
 family of Himyar. It is probable, that the 
 Cushite Sheba, and his brother Dedan, were 
 settled on the shore of the Persian Gulf (see 
 Raamah above}; but afterwards. were com- 
 bined with the great Joktanide kingdom of 
 the Sabeans. 
 
 8. Cush begat Nimrod} Nimrod is here 
 separated from the other sons of Cush, per- 
 haps because of his: great fame and mighty 
 prowess; but it is. quite possible, that the 
 words ‘¢ Cush begat Nimrod” may only mean 
 that Nimrod was a descendant of Cush, not 
 immediately his son, the custom of the He- 
 
 [v. 9, 10. 
 
 10 And the beginning of his king- 
 
 dom was | Babel, and Erech, and Ac- | Gam 
 bylon. 
 
 cad, and Calneh, in the land of 
 Shinar. 
 
 brews being to call any ancestor a father, and 
 any descendant ason. The name Nimrod is 
 commonly derived from the Hebrew marad, 
 to rebel. ‘The Eastern traditions make him a 
 man of violent, lawless habits, a rebel against 
 God, and an usurper of boundless authority 
 over his fellow-men, at whose instigation men 
 began the building of the tower of Babel. 
 (Jos. ‘Ant.’ 1. 4.). He has aecordingly been 
 identified with the Orion of the Greeks, and 
 it has been thought that the constellation 
 Orion, called by the Hebrew Kesi/ ‘the fool, 
 the impious,” and by the Arabs ‘the giant,” 
 was connected with Nimrod, who is said in 
 the LXX. to have been a “giant on the 
 earth.” The Scripture narrative, however, 
 says nothing of this violence and lawlessness, 
 and the later tradition is very doubtful and 
 vague. The LXX. spell the name Nebrod, 
 so also Josephus, which some have referred 
 to a Persian root signifying war, a warrior; 
 but this etymology is altogether uncertain, 
 and not to be relied on. 
 
 he began to be a mighty one in the earth] 
 He was the first of the sons of Noah distin- 
 guished by his warlike prowess. ‘The word 
 ‘mighty one” (in the LX X. ‘giant”) is con- 
 stantly used for a great warrior, a hero, or man 
 of renown. Cp. Gen. vi. 4; Judg. vi. 12; 
 xi. 1; 1S. ix. 3; 2 K.¥, to eee 
 Ixxvill. 65; Is. xiii. 3, &c. 
 
 9. He was a mighty hunter] LXX. “a 
 giant hunter.” Bochart says that by being a 
 famous hunter, he gathered to himself all the 
 enterprising young men of his generation, at- 
 tached them to his person, and so became a 
 kind of king among them, training his follow- 
 ers first in the chase, and then leading them 
 to war. Compare Hercules, Theseus, Mele- 
 ager, &c. among the Greeks. The Jerusalem 
 Targum renders ‘‘ He was mighty in hunting 
 and in sin before the Lord, for he was a 
 hunter of the sons of men in their languages.” 
 The Syriac also renders ‘‘a warrior.” Fol- 
 lowing these, many have understood, that he 
 was a hunter of men, rather than a hunter of 
 beasts. 
 
 before the Lorp} Is most likely added 
 only to give emphasis, or the force of a su- 
 perlative (cp. Gen. xiii. 10, Xxx. 8, XXXV. 5; 
 1S. xi. 7, Xiv. Is, XXVi co 5 eee 
 Jonah iii. 3; Acts vii. 20): though some un- 
 derstand ‘against the Lord,” as 1 Chron. 
 xiv. 8, where it is said ‘‘ David went out 
 against them,” literally ‘‘ before them.” 
 
 10. And the beginning of his kingdom was 
 Babel] The later Chaldeans and Babylonians 
 
. ae 
 
 yw £8) 12°] 
 
 ent out 
 
 to 4ssy- Asshur, and builded Nineveh, and and Calah: the same is a great 
 
 5r, te ‘the city Rehoboth, and Calah, 
 
 spoke a Semitic language, but the most ancient 
 Babylonian inscriptions shew that the earliest 
 inhabitants spoke a Turanian or Cushite 
 tongue, and were therefore of the same race 
 as the Ethiopians and Southern Arabians. 
 Moreover, the most ancient traditions bring 
 the first colonists of Babylon from the South. 
 Thus Belus, son of Poseidon and Libya, is 
 said to have led a colony from Egypt into 
 Babylonia, and there fixing his seat on the 
 Euphrates, to have consecrated the priests 
 called in Babylon Chaldeans (Diod. Sic. lib. 
 I. c. ii.): and the fish-god Oannes, the great 
 civilizer of Babylon, is said to have risen out 
 of the Red Sea (Syncell. ‘Chron.’ p. 28). Nim- 
 rod is probably to be identified with Belus; 
 but the word Belus itself (= Bel = Baal) is not 
 so much a name as a title, meaning Jord or 
 master, and may have been given traditionally 
 to the first founder of empire in the earth. 
 The words “ beginning of his kingdom” may 
 signify that Babel was the frst, or possibly 
 that it was the chief city founded by Nimrod. 
 
 Erech| ‘The Targums, Ephraim Syr. and 
 Jerome, render Edessa. Bochart says Areca 
 on the confines of Babylonia and Susiana: 
 but it is now generally agreed to be Archoé, 
 the ruins of which, called Warka, lie about 
 thirty hours to the south east of Babylon. 
 The numerous mounds and remains of bricks 
 and coffins indicate that this was probably 
 the burying place of the kings of Assyria. 
 (See Rawlinson, ‘Five Monarchies,’ Vol. 1. 
 
 p- 23.) 
 
 Accad| Spelt Archad by the LXX. and 
 Achar by the Syr., has been compared by 
 Bochart with the river Argades in Sithacene, 
 the whole region having perhaps been called 
 Archada. Le Clerc, who is followed by Ge- 
 senius, suggests Sacada, a town lying not far 
 below Nineveh, where the Lycus falls into 
 the Tigris. Knobel proposes a tract north of 
 The only ancient 
 authorities (the Targums of Jerusalem and 
 Pseudo-Jonathan, Ephraim Syrus, Jerome, 
 Barhebreeus) render the word by Nisibis, a 
 Michaelis and 
 many moderns adopt this as the probable site 
 
 Babylon called Accete. 
 
 city on the river Khabour. 
 
 of Accad. 
 Calneh| (Calneh, Amos vi. 2. 
 
 phon. 
 
 Calno, Is. 
 x. 9, perhaps Canneh, Ezek. xxvii. 23, where 
 one of De Rossi’s MSS. reads Kalneh). Targg. 
 Jer. and Pseudo-Jon., Euseb., Jerome, Ephr. 
 Syr. give Ctesiphon on the east bank of the 
 Tigris, opposite Seleucia, N.E. of Babylon. 
 The name Calneh survived in Chalonitis, a 
 region of Assyria, where Pliny places Ctesi- 
 In this identification of Calneh with 
 Ctesiphon most modern interpreters agree. 
 
 GENE SISEX: 
 
 Dr, he tr Out of that land 'went forth 
 
 89 
 
 12 And Resen between Nineveh rg, 
 
 city. 
 
 Shinar] Unquestionably the country round 
 about Babylon, the great plain or alluvial 
 country watered by the Tigris and Euphra- 
 tes. The name seems to have been Jewish; 
 though there was a town in Mesopotamia 
 known to the ancients, called Singara (Arab. 
 Sinjar); and Rawlinson found in the Assy- 
 rian and Babylonian inscriptions the name 
 Sinkareh in cuneiform characters. The name 
 too is found in Egyptian monuments of the 
 18th dynasty, from Thothmes I. 
 
 11. Out of that land went forth Asshur] 
 So LXX., Syr., Vulg., Saad., Luth., Calv., 
 J. D. Michael., Dathe, Ros., V. Bohlen. But 
 the reading of the margin, ‘‘ From this land 
 he went out into Assyria,” is the rendering of 
 all the Targums, of Nachmanides, and after 
 them, of Drusius, Bochart, Le Clerc, De 
 Wette, Baumg., Tuch, Gesenius, Knobel, 
 Delitzsch, Kalisch, and most modern inter- 
 preters. The syntax fully admits of this 
 interpretation; and the general sense of the 
 passage requires it. Nimrod is the subject 
 here treated of. Asshur, the son of Shem, 
 Vv. 22, was at least a generation older than 
 Nimrod, who may probably have first colo- 
 nized the country called after him, Asshur 
 (or Assyria); Nimrod, or one of his descend- 
 ants, afterwards invading and governing that 
 country. Asshur was a region through which 
 the Tigris flowed, to the N.E. of Babylonia, 
 including a portion of Mesopotomia. 
 
 and builded Nineveh| According to Hero- 
 dotus, Ninus (the mythic founder of Nineveh) 
 was the grandson of Belus, the mythic founder 
 of Babylon (Herod. I. 7). This, the most 
 ancient Greek tradition, well corresponds with 
 the account of Scripture, for the words ‘he 
 went out into Asshur,” might be rendered 
 ‘‘one went out into Asshur,” not distinctly 
 defining Nimrod as the individual who built 
 Nineveh. 
 
 Nineveh, the ancient metropolis of Assyria, 
 on the East branch of the Tigris, became in 
 after ages the largest and most flourishing 
 city of the old world. It is described in the 
 book of Jonah as ‘‘an exceeding great city 
 of three days’ journey” (Jon. ili. 3), with 
 120,000 children ‘‘ who knew not their right 
 hand from their left” (Jon. iv. 11), which 
 would make a population of about 2,000,000. 
 According to Diodorus Siculus, it was no 
 less than 55 miles in circumference (Diod. 
 II. 3), built, no doubt, like the ancient cities 
 of the East, with pastures and pleasure grounds 
 interspersed among streets and houses, Even 
 in Babylon, which was of less extent than 
 Nineveh, Diodorus (iI. 9) says, that there 
 were gardens and orchards, and land sufficient 
 
 he city. 
 
90 
 
 Gia Nee Prt one 
 
 13 And Mizraim begat Ludim, and 
 Anamim, and Lehabim, and Naph- 
 tuhim, : 
 
 [v. 13, 14. 
 
 14 And Pathrusim, and Casluhim, 
 (out of whom came Philistim,) and 
 Caphtorim. 
 
 to provide corn for all the people in case of a 
 siege. Nineveh is mentioned among the cities 
 or fortresses captured by Thothmes III. (see 
 Excursus, p.1). It wasattacked by Phraortes 
 the Mede, who perished in the attempt to take 
 it (Herod. I. 102). His successor, Cyaxares, 
 having laid siege to it, B.C. 625, was obliged 
 to raise the siege by an incursion of Scythians 
 (Herod. I. 103); but finally succeeded in re- 
 ducing it, B.c. 597 (Herod. I.106). From that 
 time it lay desolate, though Tacitus (‘ Ann.’ 
 XII. 13) and Ammianus (XVIII. 7) mention a 
 fortress of the name. Its site has been identi- 
 fied by modern travellers with the ruins of 
 Nebbi Yunus and Koyunjik, nearly opposite 
 to Mosul on the East banks of the ‘Tigris. 
 (See esp. Layard, ‘ Ninev.’ Vol. 11. pp. 136 ff.) 
 The language of the inscriptions discovered 
 in these ruins appears to be an ancient Semi- 
 tic dialect. ‘This is not inconsistent with the 
 foundation of the city by a descendant of 
 Nimrod; for the indigenous race was no 
 doubt derived from the colonization by As- 
 shur, the son of Shem, and the adoption of 
 the Semitic language has parallels in the cases 
 of Babylon and Canaan (see above on v. 6). 
 Moreover, it is thought that in Assyria, as 
 well as in Babylonia, two distinct languages 
 existed, the older being Turanian, the other 
 Semitic; accordingly, at Koyunjik, vocabu- 
 laries have been discovered with two languages 
 arranged in parallel columns, and tablets ap- 
 parently in a Turanian dialect have been 
 found in the ruins. 
 
 11. and the city Rehoboth] Lit. ‘the streets 
 of the city.” 
 
 12. the same is a great city] It is ex- 
 tremely difficult to identify Rehoboth, Resen 
 and Calah with any known sites. Perhaps 
 the most probable conjecture is, that the four 
 cities here named, viz. Nineveh, Rehoboth-Ir, 
 Resen, and Calah, were all afterwards com- 
 bined under the one name of Nineveh, and 
 that the words, v. 12, ‘‘the same is a great 
 city,” applied to this united whole, not to the 
 single state of Resen. ‘This is adopted by 
 Niebuhr, Grote, Knobel, Rawlinson, De- 
 litzsch. 
 
 13. Ludim] ‘There was also a son of 
 Shem named Lud, v. 22; but these Ludim 
 were an African tribe. They are probably 
 the same as Retu, the Egyptian name for 
 ‘‘man,” especially the Egyptians, ‘The name 
 appears to have belonged to the old popula- 
 tion of Central Egypt. In Jerem. xlvi. 9, 
 Cush, Phut, and Ludim are mentioned toge- 
 ther, the Ludim are said to ‘‘handle and 
 bend the bow,” and all are placed in the 
 army of Pharaoh-Necho, king of Egypt. 
 
 Again, in Ezek. xxx. 4, 5, Cush, Phut, and 
 Lud are connected with Mizraim. In Isaiah, 
 on the contrary, we find (Ixvi. 19) Lud ‘that 
 draw the bow” connected with Asiatic and 
 European tribes, Tarshish, Pul, Tubal, and 
 Javan. ‘The existence of the two tribes both 
 called Lud, the one Semite and the other 
 Hamite, is inevitably a cause of confusion. 
 
 Anamim] Another Mizraite race, concern- 
 ing whom no certain or very probable conjec- 
 ture can be made. Knobel identifies them 
 with an Egyptian name of the Delta. 
 
 Lehabim]| Generally agreed to be the same 
 as the Lubim, 2 Chr. xii. 3, xvi. 8, reckoned 
 among the Ethiopian forces, and in Nah. iii. 9, 
 Dan. xi. 43, named with the Egyptians; ac- 
 cording to Josephus, the Libyans. ‘The ori- 
 ginal home of this people appears to have 
 been to the west of the Delta. 
 
 Naphtuhim| Mentioned only here and 
 1 Chr. i.11z. Bochart, followed by Michaelis, 
 Jablonski, Gesenius and others, compares the 
 name of the Egyptian goddess Nephthys, the 
 wife of Typhon, to whom the parts of Egypt 
 bordering on the Red Sea were consecrated. 
 Plutarch (‘ De Is.’ p. 355) says, ‘‘ The Egyp- 
 tians call the extremities of the land border- 
 ing on the sea by the name of Nephthys.” 
 If this be so, the Naphtuchim were probably 
 a people dwelling on the Red Sea on the con- 
 fines of Egypt. Knobel supposes them to 
 have been the midland Egyptians, who in 
 their great city Memphis worshipped Phthah, 
 and were called in Coptic Phaphthah, ‘‘ the 
 (people) of Phthah.” 
 
 14. Pathrusim|] The people of Pathros, 
 mentioned often in the prophets (as Is. xi. 11; 
 Jer. xliv. 1; Ezek. xxixs14,9xxx) Tete 
 name Pathros occurs, sometimes as if it were 
 separate from Egypt, sometimes as if it were 
 part of Egypt; whence Bochart concluded 
 that the Thebaid was intended, which at times 
 is reckoned as in Upper Egypt, at times as 
 distinct from it. Pliny mentions Phaturites 
 as a prefecture of the Thebaid, (‘ Hist. Nat.’ 
 ]. v. c. 9, § 47). The words of Ezekiel (xxix. 
 14), where Pathros is called the land of the 
 Egyptians’ birth, is compared with Herod. 
 (11.15), who says Thebes was anciently called 
 Egypt. Pa-t-res in Egyptian means ‘the 
 land of the south.” 
 
 Caslubim] Bochart conjectured the Col- 
 chians, who were an Egyptian colony (Herod. 
 Il. 104; Diod. Sic. 1. 28; Strabo. I. 3). In 
 this he is followed by Gesenius and others, 
 though the similarity of name seems the chief 
 reason for the identification. Forster (‘ Ep. 
 ad Michael.’ p. 16 sqq.) conjectured Casiotis, 
 
v. 15, 16.] 
 
 15 4 And Canaan begat ‘Sidon his 
 firstborn, and Heth, 
 
 a region between Gaza and Pelusium, so 
 called from Mount Casius. He is followed 
 in this by Knobel, who says the name in 
 Coptic signifies burning, hence applicable to 
 a dry, arid, desert region. He combines Bo- 
 chart’s view with Forster’s, supposing that 
 the Colchians were a colony from Casiotis. 
 This view is adopted and ably defended by 
 Ebers (‘ gypten,’ &c. p. 120). 
 
 Out of whom came Philistim] In Jer. xlvii. 
 4, Amos ix. 7, the Philistines are traced to 
 the Caphtorim. Hence Michaelis and others 
 think that there has been a transposition 
 in this verse, and that it ought to run “‘ and 
 Caphtorim, out of whom came Philistim.” 
 The Samaritan text, however, and all Ver- 
 sions read as the Hebrew. Bochart there- 
 fore has conjectured, that the Casluchim and 
 Caphtorim were tribes which intermingled, 
 the Caphtorim having strengthened the Cas- 
 luchian colony by immigration, and that hence 
 the Philistines may have been said to have 
 come from either. ‘The name Philistine, which 
 probably comes from an A‘thiopic verb falasa, 
 to emigrate, is often rendered by the LXX. 
 (as Judg. xiv. 3, xiv. 1) by allophyloi, aliens, 
 foreigners. 
 
 The following difficulties are urged against 
 the Egyptian origin of the Philistines; first, 
 that their language was probably, like that of 
 the other inhabitants of Canaan, Semitic; 
 secondly, that they were uncircumcised (1 S. 
 xvii. 26), whilst Herodotus tells us that the 
 Egyptians were circumcised. ‘The linguistic 
 difficulty may be explained by the very pro- 
 bable supposition, that the invading Philis- 
 tines or Caphtorim adopted the language of 
 the conquered Avim (Deut. ii. 23), or other 
 tribe amongst whom they settled. ‘The other 
 disappears, if we consider, that everything in 
 dress, customs, and religion of the Philistines 
 indicates that they separated off from the 
 other Mizraic tribes at a very early period, 
 and that circumcision was probably adopted 
 by the Egyptians at a much later date. 
 
 Caphtorim] \t is plain from Jer. xlvii. 4, 
 where the Philistines are called ‘‘ the remnant 
 of the isle (or maritime country) of Caph- 
 tor,” that we must look for the site of the 
 Caphtorim near the sea. The Targums and 
 ancient Versions render Cappadocia, followed 
 by most of the ancients, and by Bochart. 
 Others (Swinton, Michaelis, Rosenmiiller, &c.) 
 have conjectured Cyprus, the original name 
 of which has been thought to have been 
 Cubdr or Cyptrus. Calmet and others pre- 
 fer Crete, comparing the statement of ‘Taci- 
 tus (‘ Hist.’ v. 2) concerning the Cretan origin 
 of the Jews, and supposing that he may have 
 confounded the Jews with the Philistines. 
 
 GENES DS. 0X, 
 
 16 And the Jebusite, and the Amo- 
 rite, and the Girgasite, 
 
 Gesenius mentions this with approval, and it 
 is advocated by Knobel. Recent investiga- 
 tions in Egyptian identify Caphtor with 
 Capht-ur, i.e. the Great Capht. This is 
 compared with the Egyptian name Coptos. 
 Again, the name A¢gyptus is probably identi- 
 cal with Ai-Capht, i.e. the coast of Capht, 
 (compare NADI 8, I-Caphtor, “the isle or 
 coast of Caphtor,” Jer. xlvii. 4). ‘This Capht, 
 or Capht-ur, was probably the Northern 
 Delta, from which the Phcenicians emigrated 
 into Asia. Thus Capht became the Egyptian 
 name for the oldest Phoenicians, whether in 
 Asia or in Africa, (See Ebers, ‘ A’gypt.’ &c. 
 voc. Caphtorim; see also Excursus.) 
 
 15. Sidon his first-born] Sidon was, ac- 
 cording to Justin (XVIII. 3), the oldest Phce- 
 nician state. Of all the Phoenicians Homer 
 knew only Sidon. The city stood on the 
 Eastern coast of the Mediterranean, about 
 20 miles North of Tyre, which latter is said 
 by Justin to have been a colony of Sidon. 
 So important was Sidon in most ancient times, 
 that all the Phoenicians are comprised under 
 the name of Sidonians (Josh. xiil. 6; Judg. 
 xviii. 7): and this extension of the name was 
 known to the Greeks and Romans (compare 
 Urbs Sidonia, i.e. Carthage, which was a 
 colony of Tyre, Virg. ‘En.’ 1.677; and Sido- 
 nia Dido, ‘Ain.’ 1. 446, 613, &c.). The name 
 Sidon is supposed to be derived from fishing ; 
 for the Pheenicians called fish Sidon (Gesen. 
 ‘Thesaur.’ p. 1153). 
 
 Heth| ‘The ancestors of the Hittites, who 
 inhabited the hill country of Judea, es- 
 specially in the neighbourhood of Hebron. 
 These, however, were but one portion of the 
 race, which according to Josh. i. 4 (cp. Ezek. 
 xvi. 3) became more important. In the time 
 of Solomon and Joram there were independ- 
 ent kings of the Hittites, 1 K. x. 29; 2 K. 
 vii. 6. ‘They are by most Egyptologers iden- 
 tified with the Kheta, a very powerful tribe, 
 and masters of Syria. 
 
 16. the Jebusite] Inhabitants of Jebus, 
 the ancient name of Jerusalem, mentioned 
 Judg. xix. ro, 113 1 Chir. xi. 4, 5. The Je- 
 busites, a mountain tribe (Num. xiii.29; Josh. 
 xi. 3), seem never to have been conquered, 
 or to have recovered possession of Jerusalem 
 and to have retained it, till David took Jebus, 
 1 Chr. x’. 4, 5: and even after the conquest 
 we find Araunah the Jebusite, who is called 
 ‘¢ Araunah the king” (2 S. xxiv. 23) ltving in 
 peace and prosperity in the land. 
 
 the Amorite| Apparently the most pow- 
 erful and widespread of all the Canaanitish 
 tribes, dwelling chiefly in the hill-country of 
 Judea, subject to five kings (Josh. x. 5), but 
 
Q2 
 
 t Heb. 
 Azzah. 
 
 GENESIS 
 
 17 And the Hivite, and the Arkite, 
 and the Sinite, 
 
 18 And the Arvadite, and the Ze- 
 marite, and the Hamathite: and after- 
 ward were the families of the Canaan- 
 ites spread abroad. , 
 
 1g And the border of the Canaan 
 ites was from Sidon, as thou comest 
 to Gerar, unto 'Gaza; as thou goest, 
 
 also spreading to the other side of Jordan, to 
 the North of the Arnon (Numb. xxi. 13), 
 even to the river Jabbok (Num. xxi. 24). 
 Simonis, followed by Gesenius, traces the 
 name to an old word Amor or Emor, eleva- 
 tion, mountain, the Amorites being moun- 
 taineers or highlanders. 
 
 the Girgasite| Josephus (‘ Ant.’ 1. 6) 
 says we have the name and nothing else of 
 this people. Eusebius and others have identi- 
 fied them with the Gergesenes (Matt. viii. 
 28), who lived to the East of the Lake of 
 Gennesaret. ‘There is a difference of reading 
 in St Matt.; some MSS. having Gerasenes, 
 others Gadarenes; but Gesenius thinks, that 
 Gerasa is but a corruption by the omission of 
 g from Girgasa. 
 
 17. the Hivite} <A people living in the 
 neighbourhood of Hermon and Lebanon (Josh. 
 xi. 3, Judg. vi. 3), near Sichem also (Gen. 
 xxxiv. 2), and Gibeon (Josh. ix. 1, 7): Gese- 
 nius interprets the name to signify pagani, the 
 inhabitants of villages. 
 
 the Arkite| Inhabitants, according to Jo- 
 sephus, of Arca acity of Phoenicia, near Liba- 
 nus, 12 miles to the north of Tripoli. It was 
 afterwards called Cesarea Libani, a name 
 found on coins of the reign of Vespasian. 
 Alexander Severus was born here. Shaw and 
 Burckhardt describe the ruins of a fine city 
 as still to be found there, called Te// Arka. 
 
 the Sinite] St Jerome (‘ Quest. in Genes.’ 
 ad h.1.) says, that ‘‘near Arca was another 
 city called Sini, which, though ruined, still 
 retained its ancient name.” Michaelis (‘Spicil.’ 
 Pt. II. p. 29) quotes Breidenbach (‘Itiner.’ p. 
 47) as mentioning a city of the name of Syn 
 in the same neighbourhood in the fifteenth 
 century. 
 
 18. the Arvadite] Inhabitants probably 
 of the city of Aradus, on an island of the same 
 name, about three miles from the Pheenician 
 coast. ‘The LXX. render here and elsewhere 
 the Aradite, and Josephus (‘ Ant.’ I. 6) says 
 ‘*the Aradite inhabited the island of Aradus.” 
 Gesenius derives the name from a root, signi- 
 fying ‘to wander,” and quotes Strabo (xvI. 
 2, § 13) as saying that the city was built by 
 fugitives from Sidon. 
 
 the Zemarite| ‘There is little certainty as 
 
 [v. 17—21,. 
 
 unto Sodom, and Gomorrah, and Ad- 
 mah, and Zeboim, even unto Lasha. 
 
 20 These are the sons of Ham, 
 after their families, after their tongues, 
 in their countries, avd in their nations. 
 
 21 4 Unto Shem also, the father 
 of all the children of Eber, the bro- 
 ther of Japheth the elder, even to 
 him were children born. 
 
 to the habitation of this race. ‘The ancient 
 interpreters, Targg., Rashi, Saad., and proba- 
 bly Jerome, give Emesa; Michaelis, led by 
 Bochart’s conjecture and followed by Rosenm., 
 Gesen., Knobel, suggests Samyra, a city of 
 Pheenicia on the sea coast, near the river 
 Eleutherus, the ruins of which are still called 
 Samra. 
 
 the Hamathite| Hamath was an import- 
 ant city, called by Amos (vi. 2) ‘ Great 
 Hamath,” the chief city of Upper Syria on the 
 Orontes at the foot of Libanus (Judg. iii. 3; 
 Jer. xlix. 23; Zech. ix. 2), the metropolis of 
 a region called the “land of Hamath” (2 
 K. xxiii. 33). It was called Epiphaneia by 
 the Macedonians (Jos. ‘Ant.’ I. 6). It still 
 however in the East retains the name of Ha- 
 mah, and has been visited and described by 
 Burckhardt and other modern travellers. 
 
 and afterward were the families of the 
 Canaanites spread abroad| ‘The first place of 
 habitation of the Canaanites was probably on 
 the Mediterranean, in Phoenicia, in the neigh- 
 bourhood of ‘Tyre and Sidon; but by degrees 
 they spread abroad through the whole of 
 Palestine, from Tyre and Sidon on the North 
 to Gerar and Gaza and even to Lasha. 
 
 19. Lasha| The Targum of Jerusalem 
 and Jerome (‘ Quest. ad Genes.’) identify 
 Lasha with Callirrhoé, which Pliny (‘N. H.’ 
 v. c. 6) and Josephus (‘B. J.’ I. 33) speak of 
 as famous for its warm springs. It was situ- 
 ated on the East of the Red Sea. 
 
 21. Shem also, the father of all the chil- 
 dren of Eber| As Ham is specially called the 
 father of Canaan, so probably Shem is desig- 
 nated as the father of Eber. The Hebrews 
 and the Canaanites were brought into con- 
 stant conflict and exemplified respectively the 
 characters of the Hamites and the Shemites, 
 their characters and their destinies. 
 
 the brother of Japheth the elder| ‘There 
 is a great ambiguity in the original of these 
 words. The LXX., Symm., Targ. of Onke- 
 los render as in the English text; so Rashi, 
 Abenezra, Luther, Cleric., J. D. Michael., 
 Dathe, &c. But the Syriac, Arab., Vulg. ren- 
 der “the elder brother of Japheth,” in which 
 they are followed by Rosenm., Gesenius, 
 Knobel, Delitzsch and most modern com- 
 
V. 22—25.] GENESIS.2X, 93 
 tx Chron. 22 The “children of Shem; Elam, 24 And Arphaxad begat |Salah; t Heb. 
 ‘Ha, 47 and Asshur, and 'Arphaxad, and Lud, and Salah begat Eber. ad 
 pachshad. and Aram. 25 “And unto Eber were born two ¢: Chron. 
 
 23 And the children of Aram; Uz, 71S: 
 and Hul, and Gether, and Mash. 
 
 sons: the name of one was Peleg; 
 for in his days was the earth divid- 
 
 mentators, who say, that if ‘‘the brother of 
 Japheth the Elder” had been meant, the He- 
 brew idiom would have required the addition 
 of ‘ son”—‘‘the elder son of Noah.” ‘This 
 appears to be true: moreover, Shem is gene- 
 rally mentioned first, and is perhaps put last 
 here, because the writer proceeds almost with- 
 out interruption from this point with the 
 history of the descendants of Shem. In Gen. 
 ix. 24, Ham appears to be called the youngest 
 son of Noah; but see note on that verse. On 
 the whole, the common order of enumeration 
 is probably the order of age. 
 
 22. The children of Shem] ‘The Shemites 
 dwelt chiefly in Western Asia, South of the 
 Asiatic Japhethites. 
 
 Elam] Elymais, a region adjoining Su- 
 siana and Media, called by the Arabs Chu- 
 zistan. Daniel (viii. 2) places Shushan (z. e. 
 Susa) in Elam, which immediately connects 
 Elam with Susiana. 
 
 Asshur] Without doubt the ancestor of 
 the Assyrians. At first, perhaps, the name 
 Asshur or Assyria was restricted to the re- 
 gion round about Nineveh, known to the 
 Greeks as Adiabene. Afterwards it spread, 
 especially to the North-west, and embraced 
 the Syrians. ‘The foundation of its principal 
 greatness is ascribed to the Babylonians in 
 v. Ir. ‘This corresponds with the tradition in 
 Herodotus (1. 7), which attributes the foun- 
 dation of Nineveh to Ninus, the son of Belus, 
 the founder of Babylon. 
 
 Arphaxad| Bochart conjectured that the 
 name Arrapachites, a province in Northern 
 Assyria, bordering on Armenia, was derived 
 from Arphaxad; and as this was the country 
 of the Chaldees, it has been thought that in 
 the three last consonants of the name Ar- 
 phaxad, viz. ch-s-d, are contained the ele- 
 ments of the name Chasdim (i. e. Chaldzans). 
 Josephus certainly tells us that ‘‘ Arphaxad 
 gave the name Arphaxadzans to those after- 
 wards called Chaldzans” (‘ Ant.’ I. 6). 
 
 Lud| Josephus says the Lydians (‘ Ant.’ 
 1.6). He is followed by Euseb., Jerome, and 
 by Bochart, and most moderns. The re- 
 semblance of their manners and of their more 
 ancient names to the Semitic confirms this 
 tradition. It is probable, that their first home 
 was not far from Armenia, whence they mi- 
 grated into Asia Minor. 
 
 Aram] ‘The country called Aram in Scrip- 
 ture was the highland region lying to the 
 north-east of the Holy Land, extending 
 
 from the Jordan and the Sea of Galilee to the 
 Euphrates. The name Aram has been sup- 
 posed to mean sigh (from dram=rum, to be 
 high). In Genesis we read of Aram-Naha- 
 raim, z,e. Aram between the two rivers= Me- 
 sopotamia, which, or part of which, is also 
 called Padan-Aram; and Laban who dwelt 
 there is called the Aramean (Gen. xxv. 20, 
 &c.). Homer (‘Il.’ 11. 783); Hesiod (‘Th.’ 
 304); Pindar (‘Fr.’ v. 3), &c. speak of the Sy- 
 rians as. Arimi. 
 
 23. Uz] From him no doubt was named 
 ‘the land of Uz,” in which Job lived. (Job 
 1,1.) It is there rendered by the LXX. Au- 
 sitis. Ptolemy (v. 19) mentions the Msite 
 as inhabiting the northern part of Arabia De- 
 serta, near to Babylon and the Euphrates, 
 which Bochart, Gesenius, and others, identify 
 with the inhabitants of Uz or Ausitis. ‘The 
 name Uz occurs also among the descendants 
 of Abraham (Gen. xxii. 21), and again (Gen. 
 XxxXvi. 28) among the descendants of Seir the 
 Hivite; and it has been conjectured, with 
 more or less probability, that these different 
 Semitic families may have coalesced. 
 
 Hul] Josephus places in Armenia, accord- 
 ing to Bochart, that part called Cholobotene 
 by the Greeks, as though it were Beth-Chul, 
 the home of Hul. Michaelis, followed by 
 Knobel, suggests that the name Czlesyria 
 may have come from Hul or Chul. Rosen- 
 miiller has suggested the Ard el Hhuleh, a 
 district near the sources of the Jordan. 
 
 Gether] No probable site has been fixed 
 on for the descendants of Gether. 
 
 Mash] Josephus (‘ Ant.’ 1.6) says, ‘‘ Mash 
 founded the Mesanzans,” 7.e. the inhabitants 
 of Mesene, near Bassora, where the Tigris and 
 Euphrates fall into the Persian Gulf. The 
 opinion of Bochart is adopted by Gesenius, 
 Winer, Knobel, and others, that the descend- 
 ants of Mash were the inhabitants of Mons 
 Masius, a range of hills to the North of Me- 
 sopotamia. 
 
 24. <Arphaxad begat Salah; and Salah 
 begat Eber] The name Salah appears to signify 
 sending forth, extension, as Eber, the name of 
 his son, signifies passing over. Many of the 
 names in these genealogies are significant, and 
 were probably given to their bearers late in 
 life, or even historically, after their deaths. 
 Salah and Eber seem to point to this fact, 
 that the descendants of Arphaxad were now 
 beginning to spread forth from the first cradle 
 of the Semitic race, and to cross over the 
 
94 
 
 GEN Si Saas. 
 
 ed; and his brother’s name was Jok- 
 tan. 
 
 26 And Joktan begat Almodad, 
 and Sheleph, and Hazarmaveth, and 
 Jerah, 
 
 [v. 26—29. 
 
 27 And Hadoram, and Uzal, and 
 Diklah, 
 
 28 And Obal, and Abimael, and 
 Sheba, 
 
 29 And Ophir, and Havilah, and 
 
 great rivers on their way to Mesopotamia, 
 and thence to Canaan. 
 
 25. Peleg; for in his days was the earth 
 divided| It is generally supposed from this, 
 that Peleg lived contemporaneously with the 
 dispersion of Babel. It is, however, quite 
 possible, that the reference is to a more par- 
 tial division of regions and separation of races. 
 The genealogy is now specially concerned 
 with the descendants of Shem and the ances- 
 try of the promised race, which is here traced 
 down to Peleg to be continued farther in ch. 
 xi. 18 sqq. The two races, which sprang 
 from Eber, soon separated very widely from 
 each other, the one, Eber and his family, 
 spreading north-westward towards Mesopo- 
 tamia and Syria, the other, the Joktanides, 
 southward into Arabia. As the sacred nar- 
 rative in vv. 31, 32, speaks expressly of the 
 general spreading forth of the sons of Noah, 
 and in ch. xi. 1—g relates the confusion of 
 their languages, it is very probable that in 
 this verse the division of the land concerns 
 only the separation of the Shemites. 
 
 Joktan| ‘There is a general consent in fa- 
 vour of the colonization of Southern Arabia 
 by the descendants of Joktan, with the names 
 of whom correspond several of the districts 
 and cities of that country. The Arabs iden- 
 tify Joktan with Kaltan, who was the tra- 
 ditional ancestor of the Beni Kahtan, inha- 
 bitants of Yemen or Arabia Felix. In Ara- 
 bia the Joktanides, no doubt, found some 
 peoples settled there already, viz. the Cushite 
 descendants of Ham (ver. 7), and the Ludite 
 descendants of Shem (ver. 22). The Arabic 
 authors are silent concerning any Cushites, 
 but derive the ancient Arabic races from the 
 Kahtanides (z.e. the Joktanides). 
 
 26. Almodad| The names Modad and 
 Morad (r being often a corruption of d by a 
 clerical error) occur frequently in Arabic ge- 
 nealogies. ‘The syllable .4/ is probably the 
 definite article. 
 
 Sheleph| has been compared by Bochart 
 with the Salopeni of Ptolemy (v1. 7), in- 
 habiting the interior of Arabia, and is iden- 
 tified with a tribe of Sulaph or Seliph in Ye- 
 men. ‘The Arabic writers speak of a large 
 region called Salfie, south-west of Sanaa. 
 
 Hazarmaveth| The name agrees in every 
 letter with Hadramaut, the name of a pro- 
 vince on the southern coast of Arabia, fa- 
 mous for its fertility in myrrh and frankin- 
 cense, and for the unhealthiness of its climate. 
 
 Jerah| ‘The name in Hebrew signifies the 
 
 moon. Bochart has suggested the identifica- 
 tion of his descendants with the Alilei 
 (Agatharch. c. 49; Strabo, xvI. p. 277) =the 
 Beni Hilal (‘‘the sons of the new moon”), ~ 
 who dwelt south of Chawlan. 
 
 27. Hadoram] ‘There has been no sa- 
 tisfactory identification of the descendants 
 of Hadoram with any known race, though 
 Bochart compared the Adramite of Ptolemy 
 (vi. 7) and the Atramite of Pliny (vI. 28) 
 in the south of Arabia. 
 
 Uzal] ‘This name is identified with Aw- 
 zal, the ancient name of Sanaa, the capital 
 city of Yemen. 
 
 Diklah]| in Syriac signifies Palm; whence 
 Bochart and Gesenius identified the descend- 
 ants of Diklah with the Minzi, a people 
 of Yemen, who inhabited a palm-growing 
 country. Michaelis conjectured a people con- 
 tiguous to the Tigris, the name of which river 
 in Syriac and Arabic was Diklat. 
 
 28. Obal, and Abimael| Only very un- 
 certain conjectures have been made as to 
 these names. 
 
 Sheba] We read much of Sheba, a coun- 
 try in Arabia Felix, abounding in gold, pre- 
 cious stones, frankincense, and famous for 
 its merchandise (1 K. x. 10; Job vi. 19; Ps. 
 Ixxil. “ro, 15; Is. lx. 63 Jer. vigor) emer 
 XXVIl. 22; Joel ili. 8). The Arabic and Greek 
 accounts of the Sabzans, a people, whose 
 capital was Saba or Mariaba, three or four 
 days’ journey from Senaa, correspond tho- 
 roughly with all this. See on ver. 7 above. 
 
 29. Ophir] On no geographical question 
 has a greater diversity of opinion existed than 
 on the site of Ophir. ‘The position of Ophir, 
 as ason of Joktan, and the settlement of the 
 other Joktanides in Arabia, form a strong 
 argument in favour of placing Ophir in Ara- 
 bia also. ‘The historical notices, however, in 
 the books of Kings and Chronicles (1 K. ix. 
 26—28, X. II, Xxil. 48; 2 Chr. viii. 18, ix. 10) 
 have inclined many to place Ophir either in 
 India or in Africa: whilst others have thought, 
 that two Ophirs are mentioned in Scripture, 
 one in Arabia, the other in India or Ceylon. 
 The question is discussed at length by Gese- 
 nius, ‘Thes.’ p. 142. See also ‘Dict. of Bible,’ 
 s. v. Ophir. 
 
 Havilahb| It is generally thought that 
 Chawlan, in Arabia Felix, was the home of 
 the descendants of Havilah. (On the Cushite 
 Havilah, see note on v. 7.) Whilst some 
 have thought that there were two Chaw- 
 
Vv. 30. 4.| 
 
 Jobab: all these were the sons of 
 Joktan. 
 
 30 And their dwelling was from 
 Mesha, as thou goest unto Sephar a 
 mount of the east. 
 
 31 These are the sons of Shem, 
 after their families, after their tongues, 
 in their lands, after their nations. 
 
 32 These are the families of the 
 sons of Noah, after their generations, 
 in their nations: and by these were 
 the nations divided in the earth after 
 the flood. 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 1 One language in the world. 3 The building 
 
 lans, one belonging to the descendants of the 
 Joktanide and the other to the sons of the 
 Cushite Havilah; others have thought that the 
 two races were intermingled and confounded. 
 
 Jobab| Ptolemy (vI. 7) mentions the Jo- 
 barite near the Indian Sea, which Bochart 
 conjectured to have been Jobabitz, in which 
 he is followed by Gesenius. Bochart and Ge- 
 senius think the name to be= the Arabic Je- 
 bab, a desert. 
 
 30. And their dwelling was from Mesha, 
 as thou goest unto Sephar a mount of the East] 
 Mesha has been identified by Bochart with 
 the seaport of Musa or Muza, mentioned by 
 Ptolemy vi. 8; Pliny vi. 23, &c. Michaelis, 
 followed by Rosenmiiller, Gesenius, &c. pre- 
 ferred Mesene, a place at the mouth of the 
 Tigris and Euphrates, not far from Bassora. 
 
 Sephar| is pretty certainly Zafar or 
 Dhafari, a seaport on the coast of Hadra- 
 maut. It is pronounced in modern Arabic 
 Isfor, and is not so much one town as a series 
 of villages near the shore of the Indian Ocean. 
 (Fresnel, quoted by Gesenius, p. 968.) 
 
 CuHAp. XI.1. one language] ‘The general 
 opinion of the Jews and ancient Christians 
 was that this language was Hebrew. The 
 names of the most ancient places and persons 
 mentioned in Scripture being Hebrew seems 
 to countenance this belief. But it is impos- 
 sible to arrive at any certainty on the question, 
 it being notorious that names have been trans- 
 lated from one language into another in many 
 instances. 
 
 2. it came to pass, as they journeyed from 
 the east} On the difficulty in these words, 
 and on the first home of the descendants of 
 Noah, see note on viii. 4. If Armenia was 
 that first home, we must suppose either that 
 they had journeyed in a south-easterly direc- 
 tion before they turned towards Shinar, and 
 then they would journey from the east, or we 
 
 GEN Pests en I. 
 
 95 
 
 of Babel. 5 The confusion of tongues. 10 The 
 generations of Shem. 27 The generations of 
 Terah the father of Abram. 31 Terah goeth 
 Jrom Ur to Haran. 
 
 ND @the whole earth was of one ¢ Wisd. 10. 
 language, and of one ‘speech. ? ep. xg, 
 
 2 And it came to pass, as they ! Heb. 
 journeyed from the east, that they 
 found a plain in the land of Shinar; 
 and they dwelt there. 
 
 3 And ‘they said one to another, t Heb. 
 
 woras. 
 
 amansaid 
 
 Go to, let us make brick, and ‘burn % xis 
 
 them throughly. And they had brick 74/7" 
 
 for stone, and slime had they for 1 ae thent 
 
 a burn- 
 
 morter. 
 4 And they said, Go to, let us 
 
 ing. 
 
 must render ‘‘eastward,” lit. ‘‘on the sides 
 of the east.” 
 
 a plain) ‘The word more naturally means 
 a deep valley, but it is often used of a wide 
 vale or plain. 
 
 Shinar] Without doubt the region round 
 about Babylon, to which, besides Babylon, 
 pertained the cities of Erech, Kalneh and 
 Accad (Gen. x. 10, where see note). The 
 fertility of this country for the production of 
 wheat is greatly praised by Herodotus (1. 
 
 193). 
 
 3. Jet us make brick, and burn them 
 throughly| ‘The regions of Assyria and Baby-= 
 lonia consisting of rich alluvial plains would 
 provide no stone and were specially abundant 
 in brick earth. Hence, when Nimrod built 
 Babel and other towns in Shinar (ch. x. Io), 
 he and those with him must have learned the 
 art of brick-making. The building of villages 
 in the earlier settlements of the Noachide had 
 been probably of wood or stone. 
 
 they had brick for stone, and slime had they for 
 morter| All the versions give asphalte or bitu- 
 men for the word chemer, ‘“‘slime”. Herod. 
 (1.179) describes the building of the walls of 
 Babylon much as the sacred history describes 
 this building of the tower of Babel. He says 
 a deep foss was dug all round the city, from 
 which the mud was taken in large bricks and 
 burnt in furnaces. ‘Then for mud or mortar, 
 they used hot bitumen, and so built the walls 
 of the city. He mentions a town called Is, 
 with a river of the same name near it, about 
 eight days’journey from Babylon, where much 
 bitumen was obtained and carried to Babylon 
 for the building of the city. See also Strabo 
 (Lib. xvi. p. 74), who speaks of the excel- 
 lence of the Babylonian bitumen for building. 
 Justin also (Lib. 1.2) speaks of Semiramis as 
 having built Babylon with brick and liquid 
 bitumen, which flowed in great abundance in 
 the neighbourhood. Diodor. Sicul. (I. 12), 
 
GENES Sew 
 
 build us a city and a tower, whose 
 top may reach unto heaven; and let 
 us make us a name, lest we be scat- 
 tered abroad upon the face of the 
 whole earth. 
 
 Pliny (‘ H. N.’ xxxi. 5), Athenzeus (Lib. II. 
 5), and other ancient writers, mention a lake 
 close to Babylon abounding in bitumen, which 
 floated on the waters. (See Reland, ‘ Palestin.’ 
 II. pp. 244, 245). The town of Is, mentioned 
 by Herodotus (as above), is identified by mo- 
 dern travellers with Heets, where bitumen 
 pits are still found on the western bank of the 
 Euphrates. Some of the heaps of ruins, which 
 have been identified with the ruins of Baby- 
 lon, exhibit specimens of sun-dried bricks laid 
 in bitumen, producing walls of great strength 
 and solidity. Mr Layard tells us that at Birs 
 Nimrod, ‘‘’The cement, by which the bricks 
 were united, is of so tenacious a quality, that 
 it is almost impossible to detach one from the 
 other,” (‘Nineveh and Babylon,’ p. 499). 
 
 4. a tower, whose top may reach unto hea- 
 ven| That is to say ‘¢a very high tower,” just 
 as the cities of the Canaanites were said to be 
 ‘‘sreat and walled up to heaven” (Deut. i. 28, 
 ix. 1), or as Homer (‘Od.’ v. 239), speaks of 
 a pine tree ‘“‘high as heaven.” Many have 
 identified this tower with the temple of Belus 
 (Herod. I. 181), which is described as con- 
 sisting of eight squares one upon the other, 
 the dimensions of the lowest or base being a 
 stadium in length and in breadth. ‘The mound 
 called Birs Nimroud is generally supposed to 
 be the ruin of the temple of Belus. 
 
 let us make us a name, lest we be scattered 
 abroad upon the face of the whole earth] Jose- 
 phus gives as the motive for building the 
 tower of Babel, that the builders feared 
 another deluge, and hoped that the tower 
 would be high enough to save them from its 
 waters; Nimrod, the leader in the scheme, 
 boasting that he could so defy the vengeance 
 of God. Again some have thought, that Noah 
 had deliberately marked out the settlements of 
 his posterity (Usher, ad A. M. 1757), and that 
 Nimrod and his followers were unwilling 
 to submit to this. ‘Then some Jewish wri- 
 ters have interpreted the word zame (Shem) 
 to mean God, ‘‘the name of God” being often 
 put for God Himself; and so have imagined 
 that the builders of the tower proposed to 
 make an idol temple. Others have supposed 
 that the descendants of Ham under Nimrod 
 made here some reference to Shem, the fa- 
 voured son of Noah, as though they would 
 have said, ‘‘ A blessing has been promised to 
 Shem, but we will make a Shem for our- 
 selves.” Clericus suggested that the word 
 Shem meant here a monument (cp. 2 S. 
 viii. 13). The simplest sense of the pas- 
 
 [v. 5, 6. 
 
 5 And the Lorp came down to 
 see the city and the tower, which the 
 children of men builded. | 
 
 6 And the Lorp said, Behold, the 
 
 people zs one, and they have all one 
 
 sage seems the true. In ch. x. 10, we find 
 that Nimrod founded a kingdom in Shinar. 
 He and his foltowers were apparently actu- 
 ated by an ambitious spirit, not satisfied with 
 the simplicity. of a patriarchal life, nor willing 
 to be scattered abroad, as so many were, by 
 the migratory instinct that seems to have led 
 the descendants of Noah thus early to form 
 extensive settlements, but desiring to found 
 an empire, to build a city, with a strong 
 citadel, and so to hold together in a power- 
 ful commonwealth, and to establish for them- 
 selves a name, fame, importance, renown, 
 thereby, it may be, attracting others to join 
 their community. Perhaps there was an al- 
 lusion to this in the prophecy (Is. xiv. 22), 
 “‘T will...cut off from Babylon the name 
 and remnant and son and nephew” (7. e. grand- 
 son or posterity) ‘‘saith the Lorp.” ‘The 
 tradition which assigns the lead in the build- 
 ing of the tower of Babel to Nimrod was 
 ancient and general, (See Joseph, ‘ Ant.’ 1. 
 4, Aug. ‘ De Civit. Dei,’ xvi. 4, &c.) It may 
 have arisen chiefly from what is said of him 
 in ch, X. 9, 10, 11. It is worthy of remark, 
 that, though the descendants of Shem and 
 Japheth shared in the judgment which con- 
 founded the tongues, yet their dialects have 
 to this day a nearer resemblance between 
 themselves than those which may perhaps be 
 attributed to the children of Ham, As the 
 Shemites and Japhethites have had a higher 
 civilization, so they have retained a purer 
 language. ‘The Semitic dialects all have a 
 strong family likeness, The Aryan or Indo- 
 European (i.e, probably the Japhetic) dialects, 
 though more diverse than the Semitic, are yet 
 all easily assignable to a common origin ; whilst 
 the Turanian and other languages branch off 
 into endless varieties, 
 
 5. the Lorp came down to see| An in- 
 stance of the natural anthropomorphic lan- 
 guage suited to the teaching of man in a state 
 of simple and partial civilization, 
 
 the children of men builded| It has been 
 thought, though perhaps on_ insufficient 
 ground, that ‘‘children of men” as in ch, Vi. 2, 
 designates the impious portion of the human 
 race, bad men, as opposed to ‘children of 
 God ;” and possibly the rebellious offspring 
 of Ham, 
 
 6. this they begin to do| Perhaps rather 
 ‘‘this is the beginning of their deeds.” ‘This 
 is their first act of daring and impiety, and 
 unless they be effectually checked, nothing 
 will restrain them from going farther and 
 farther, 
 
[hat is, 
 
 onfusion. 
 
 Vv. 7—13-| 
 
 language; and this they begin to do: 
 and now nothing will be restrained 
 from them, which they have imagined 
 to do. 
 
 7 Go to, let us go down, and there 
 confound their language, that they 
 may not understand one another’s 
 speech. 
 
 8 So the Lorp scattered them 
 abroad from thence upon the face of 
 all the earth: and they left off to 
 build the city. 
 
 Therefore is the name of it called 
 | Babel; because the Lorp did there 
 
 GENESISVAL 
 
 confound the language of all the 
 earth: and from thence did the Lorp 
 scatter them abroad upon the face of 
 all the earth. 
 
 10 4 “These are the generations *: Chron, 
 of Shem: Shem was an hundred years * ** 
 
 old, and begat Arphaxad two years 
 after the flood: 
 
 11 And Shem lived after he begat 
 Arphaxad five hundred years, and be- 
 gat sons and daughters. 
 
 12 And Arphaxad lived five and 
 thirty years, and begat Salah: 
 
 13 And Arphaxad lived after he 
 
 re 
 
 8. they left off to build the city| It 
 seems, therefore, very doubtful how far the 
 builders could have proceeded in building 
 their tower, and hardly likely that the famous 
 temple of Belus should have been to any con- 
 siderable extent erected by them, though not 
 improbably that great structure may have been 
 raised on the foundation laid at this time. 
 The tradition that God overturned it with a 
 tempest (Jos.‘Ant.’1. 6; Euseb. ‘ Prep. Evang.’ 
 1x. 4), though probably unfounded, witnesses 
 to its not having been completed. 
 
 9. Babel] From Balal, to confound, con- 
 tracted from Balbal, confusion, ‘The Greek 
 tradition was, that the city was named after 
 Belus, its mythic founder. So the Etymo- 
 
 logicum Magnum says that ‘ Babylon was 
 
 named after Belus, who founded it.” Hence 
 Eichhorn suggested, that the name originally 
 was Bab Bel, “the gate or court of Bel,” 
 i.e. Baal or Belus, So Rosenmiiller, Gese- 
 nius and others have thought it might be Bab 
 Il, the “*Gate of God,” ‘These derivations are 
 really much less likely than that given by 
 Moses, There was no such person as Belus, 
 except that Nimrod, whose scriptural name 
 probably signifies rebe/, may by his own people 
 have been called Baal, Belus, Lord. 
 
 Hebrew Text. 
 
 Years 
 before | Rest 
 birth of} of Life, 
 
 Years 
 before 
 
 Whole 
 Life. 
 
 Son. 
 
 Shem 
 Arphaxad 
 Kainan 
 Salah 
 Eber 
 Peleg 
 Reu 
 Serug 
 Nahor 
 Terah 
 Abraham 
 
 OL. le 
 
 600 
 438 
 
 500 
 403 
 
 403 
 430 
 209 
 207 
 200 
 119 
 135 
 
 433 
 404 
 239 
 239 
 230 
 148 
 205 
 
 Samaritan. 
 
 Rest 
 birth of | of Life. | of Life. 
 
 500 
 3°93 
 
 10. These are the generations of Shem] 
 We have here the third genealogical table. 
 The 1st was given in ch, v. from Adam to 
 Noah; the and in ch, x, the genealogy of the 
 three sons of Noah, the descendants of Shem 
 being traced down as far as Peleg. Now we 
 have the line of Shem farther carried down to 
 Abraham, the father ofthe faithful, theancestor 
 of the promised seed, In ch, x. no account Is 
 given of the length of the generations or of the 
 duration of life; but here in ch, xi, as before 
 in ch, v., both these are supplied. Concerning 
 the chronological question and the ages of the 
 patriarchs, see Introduction and on ch, v. note 
 A. It may be observed here, that we mark at 
 once the transition from the antediluvian to 
 the postdiluvian duration of life. Noah lived 
 gs50 years, Shem only 600, Arphaxad, the first 
 born of Shem after the deluge, only 438; when 
 we come to Peleg, who seems to have been 
 contemporary with the dispersion, life is still 
 shorter, Peleg lived 239 years, Reu 239, Serug 
 230, Nahor 148. 
 
 The following table exhibits the different 
 calculations according to the Hebrew, the 
 Samaritan, and the Septuagint texts respect- 
 ively, 
 
 Septuagint. Hebrew Text. 
 tabs Year | Year of 
 Whole | before | Rest | Whole : 
 
 i birth of of Life.] Life of pecs eee 
 600 | 100 | 500 | Goo | 1558 | 2158 
 438 | 135 | 400 | 535 | 1658 | 2097 
 
 130 | 330 ; 460 
 
 433 | 130 | 330 | 460 1693 | 2126 
 404 | 134 | 270 | 404 | 1723 2187 
 239 | 130 | 209 | 339 | 1757 1996 
 239 | 132 | 207 | 339 1787 | 2026 
 230 | 130 | 200 | 330 1819 | 1997 
 148 | 179 128 | 304 | 1849 | 1997 
 145 70 135 209 | 1878 2083 
 
 1948 | 2123 
 
 G 
 
 97 
 
 7 
 
98 
 
 begat Salah four hundred and three 
 years, and begat sons and daugh- 
 ters. 
 14 And Salah lived thirty years, 
 and begat Eber: 
 15 And Salah lived after he begat 
 Eber four hundred and three years, 
 and begat sons and daughters. 
 ¢x Chron, 16 And Eber lived four and thir- 
 @Cailed, ty years, and begat “Peleg: 
 pyke335 47 And Eber lived after he begat 
 ' Peleg four hundred and thirty years, 
 and begat sons and daughters. 
 
 18 And Peleg lived thirty years, 
 and begat Reu: 
 
 Ig And Peleg lived after he begat 
 Reu two hundred and nine years, and 
 begat sons and daughters. 
 
 20 And Reu lived two and thirty 
 years, and begat ¢Serug: 
 
 21 And Reu lived after he begat 
 Serug two hundred and seven years, 
 and begat sons and daughters, 
 
 € Luke 3. 
 35,Saruch. 
 
 GEAN.E SiS aed: 
 
 [v. 14—29, 
 
 22 And Serug lived thirty years, 
 and begat Nahor: 
 23 And Serug lived after he begat 
 Nahor two hundred years, and begat 
 sons and daughters. 
 24 And Nahor lived nine and 
 twenty years, and begat “Terah: SF Luke 3. 
 25 And Nahor lived after he begat 3» 7%”# 
 Terah an hundred and nineteen years, 
 and begat sons and daughters. : 
 26 And Terah lived seventy years, 
 and * begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran. ¢ Joshua 
 27 4 Now these are the genera= 7 Chron. « 
 tions of Terah: Terah begat Abram, 2° 
 Nahor, and Haran; and Haran begat 
 Lot. 
 28 And Haran died before his fa- 
 ther ‘Terah in the land of his nativity, 
 in Ur of the Chaldees. 
 29 And Abram and Nahor took 
 them wives: the name of Abram’s 
 wife was Sarai; and the name of 
 
 Nahor’s wife, Milcah, the daughter 
 
 Tee ee 
 
 27. Now these are the generations of Terah] 
 Not perhapsa distinct genealogy, but the wind- 
 ing up of the genealogy which had already 
 been traced to the sons of Terah, and the ex- 
 panding it into a fuller account of the fami- 
 lies of these sons and especially of Abra- 
 ham. 
 
 28. Ur of the Chaldees] Mentioned only 
 here. There is great diversity of Opinion as 
 to the site of this city, except that it was in 
 Chaldza, i.e. the southern part of Babylonia. 
 Bochart, followed by Michaelis, Rosenmiiller 
 and many others, identified it with Ur, which is 
 mentioned by Ammianus Marcellinus (XXv. 8. 
 col. 26), when describing the return of the 
 Roman army under Jovian after the death of 
 Julian, as lying between Nisibis and the Tigris. 
 Ancient tradition and the opinion of many 
 moderns connect it with the modern Orfa, 
 the Edessa of the Greeks, well known’ in 
 Christian times as the capital of Abgarus, 
 its first Christian King, who is said to have 
 written a letter to, and to have received a 
 letter from our Saviour. ‘The traditions of 
 Abraham still live in the mouths of the Arab 
 inhabitants of Orfa. The city lies on the 
 edge of one of the bare rugged spurs which 
 descend from the mountains of Armenia, into 
 the Assyrian plains in the cultivated land, 
 which, as lying under the mountains, was 
 called Padan-Aram. Two physical features 
 must have secured it from the earliest times 
 as a nucleus for the civilization of those 
 regions. One is a high crested crag, the 
 natural fortification of the present citadel, 
 
 doubly defended by a trench of immense 
 depth, cut out of the living rock behind it. 
 The other is an abundant spring (the Callir- 
 rhoe of the Greek writers) issuing in a pool 
 of transparent clearness and embosomed in a 
 mass of luxuriant verdure, which, amidst the 
 dull brown desert all around, makes, and 
 must always have made, this spot an oasis, a 
 Paradise in the Chaldzean wilderness.” (Dean 
 Stanley ‘On the Jewish Church,’ 1. p. 7.) 
 Eupolemus as quoted by Euseb. ‘Prep. Evang.’ 
 IX. 17, says that Abraham was born in the 
 city of Babylonia called Camarine, which 
 some say is the city Uria, and by interpreta- 
 tion city of the Chaldees, which Gesenius ex- 
 plains by saying that Ur in Sanscrit signifies 
 city, country, (cognate perhaps with the He- 
 brew Jr, ), the original language of the 
 Chaldees having been cognate with the Indian 
 and Persian. This city is supposed to be now 
 represented by the ruins Umgheir on the right 
 bank of the Euphrates, which appears by its 
 bricks to have been called Hur by the natives, 
 (Professor Rawlinson in ‘ Dict. of Bible.’) 
 
 29. Iscah] According to Josephus (‘ Ant.’ 
 I. 6), Targum Pseudo-Jonathan and Jerome 
 (‘ Qu. in Genes.’) the same as Sarai. This, 
 however, hardly seems consistent with Gen. xx. 
 12, where Abram speaks of Sarai as daughter 
 of his father but not of his mother; though 
 it is very difficult to say with what exactness 
 the terms father, daughter, brother, &c. are 
 used. Ewald has conjectured that Iscah was 
 Lot’s wife and therefore mentioned here; but 
 there is no evidence for this, 
 
ore oe 
 
 Vv. 30—2.] GENE Stormer ATT. 99 
 of Haran, the father of Milcah, and 
 the father of Iscah. 
 
 o But Sarai was barren; she had 
 no child. 
 
 31 And Terah took Abram his 
 son, and Lot the son of Haran his 
 son’s son, and Sarai his daughter in 
 law, his son Abram’s wife ; and they 
 
 ‘Neh. 9, went forth with them from “Ur of 
 
 jadiths, 7. the Chaldees, to go into the land of 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 1 God calleth Abram, and blesseth him with a 
 promise of Christ. 4 He departeth with Lot 
 
 _ from Haran. 6 He journeyeth through Ca- 
 naan, 7 which is promised him in a vision. 
 10 He is driven by a famine into Egypt. 11 
 Fear maketh’ him feign his wife to be his sis- 
 ter. 14 Pharaoh, having taken her from him, 
 by plagues ts compelled to restore her. 
 
 OW the *Lorp had said unto ¢ Acts7. 3. 
 Abram, Get thee out of thy 
 
 Acts 7. 4¢ Canaan; and they came unto Haran, 
 
 and dwelt there. 
 
 32 And the days of Terah were 
 two hundred and five years: and Te- 
 rah died in Haran. 
 
 country, and from thy: kindred, and 
 from thy father’s house, unto a land 
 that I will shew thee: 
 
 2, And I will make of thee a great 
 nation, and I will bless thee, and 
 
 31. and they went forth with them] i.e. 
 Terah and Abram went forth with Lot and 
 Sarai. ‘The Samaritan (followed by LXX. 
 and Vulg.) by a slight transposition of the let- 
 ters and different pointing reads ‘‘ He brought 
 them forth.” 
 
 Haran] The Carrhe of the Greeks and 
 
 Romans, where Crassus fell, defeated by the 
 Parthians (Plutarch, ‘ Vit. Cras.’ 25. 27. 28. 
 Plin. v. 24). It is called Charran in Acts 
 Vii. 4. 
 82. two hundred and five years| ‘The 
 Samaritan Pentateuch has here one hundred 
 and forty five, which Bochart and others con- 
 sider the right number. St Stephen (Acts 
 vii. 4) says the migration of Abram into 
 Canaan was after his father’s death: but from 
 v. 26 supra it seems as if Terah was only 
 70 when Abram was born, and by xil. 4 
 we find that Abram was 75 when he left 
 Haran. ‘This, according to the Samaritan, 
 would appear to be the very year of his 
 father’s death. It is certain that the Samari- 
 tan text cannot have been tampered with by 
 any Christian hand to bring it into conformity 
 with St Stephen’s statement, and it may very 
 likely have preserved the true reading. It is 
 possible, however, that Terah may have 
 been really 130 years old when Abram was 
 born: for though it is said in ver. 26 that 
 Terah lived seventy years and begat Abram, 
 Nahor and Haran, yet it does not follow that 
 Abram was the eldest son, having been named 
 first as being the heir of the promises and the 
 subject of the future history. Indeed some 
 of the rabbins consider Abram to have been 
 the youngest son, in which case he may have 
 been born when his father was 130 years old 
 (see Wordsworth on Acts vii. 4). 
 
 Cuap. XII.1. Now the Lorp had said] 
 Now the LORD said. The former chap- 
 ter had carried the history down to the 
 death of Terah. ‘The present chapter returns 
 to the date of the call of Abram. In Acts 
 
 vii. 2 St Stephen tells us, what also appears 
 most likely from the history in Gen., that 
 God appeared to Abram ‘‘ when he was in 
 Mesopotamia, before he. dwelt in Charran.” 
 This led our translators to render “ had said.” 
 The Hebrew lacks the pluperfect tense; but 
 the continuous character of the narrative from 
 this point marks the propriety of adopting a 
 simple perfect, which is also the rendering of 
 the ancient versions. ‘The recounting briefly 
 of events up to the death of ‘Terah in the last 
 chapter was by a prolepsis. We have here 
 the beginning of a new Chapter in the history, 
 of a new dispensation and a new covenant. 
 Henceforth the narrative concerns only the 
 chosen people of God and those who affect 
 them and their fortunes. 
 
 Get thee out of thy country] Lit. Go thee, 
 a pleonasm of the pronoun, common in many 
 languages. ‘The call was evidently from the 
 birthplace of Abram, Ur of the Chaldees; 
 and not only Abram, but his father and 
 other of his family seem at first to have 
 obeyed the call: for Terah took Abram and 
 Lot and Sarai, and ‘‘they went forth from Ur 
 of the Chaldees to go into the land of Canaan” 
 (ch. xi. 31). ‘The land is here called by the 
 Almighty ‘the land that I will shew thee,” 
 but Moses, in ch. xi. 31, calls it the land of 
 Canaan, the destination of Abram being 
 known to Moses, though it was not at the 
 time of his call known to Abram himself. 
 
 2. I will make of thee a great nation] 
 Literally fulfilled in the glories of Israel, 
 spiritually and more largely in the spiritual 
 sons of Abraham, ‘‘ Abraham’s seed and heirs 
 according to the promise,” Gal. iii. 29. 
 
 and thou shalt be a blessing| Kimchi on 
 Zech. viii. 12, followed by Clericus and 
 Knobel, interprets ‘‘shalt be an example or 
 type of blessing,” so that men shall say 
 ‘Blessed be thou, as Abraham was blessed.” 
 Others, as Rosenmiiller, Gesenius, &c. con~ 
 sider the substantive to be put for the parti~. 
 
 G2 
 
TOO 
 
 make thy name great; and thou shalt 
 be a blessing: 
 3 And I will bless them that bless 
 
 thee, and curse him that curseth thee: 
 
 chap. 18. 2and in thee shall all families of the 
 
 8. 
 & 02.18. earth be blessed. 
 Acts 3. 25, 
 Gal. 3. 8. 
 
 4 So Abram departed, as the Lorp 
 had spoken unto him; and Lot went 
 with him: and Abram was seventy 
 and five years old when he departed 
 out of Haran. 
 
 ciple, a blessing for blessed, comp. Zech. viii. 
 12. More probable, as well as more natural, 
 is the interpretation adopted by Tuch, De- 
 litzsch, Keil, and others, and commended by 
 the last words of v. 3, ‘‘Thou shalt be a 
 blessing or cause of blessing to others besides 
 thyself.” 
 
 3. I will bless them that bless thee, and 
 curse him that curseth thee| God's blessing 
 was to extend to Abram’s friends and fol- 
 lowers, and the enemies of Abram were to be 
 subject to God’s curse. ‘Two different He- 
 brew words are here translated by the one 
 English word curse. Some think that the 
 one expresses more properly the reviling and 
 malediction of man, the other the withering 
 curse of God. Both, however, are used of 
 God and of man, cp. Job iii. 8; Deut. xxi. 
 23. ‘The first in the English Version, that 
 used of God, is undoubtedly the stronger of 
 the two. 
 
 in thee shall all families of the earth be 
 blessed| Were again Rashi, Cleric., Knobel, 
 and some others interpret the words to mean 
 that Abram should be so blessed in his family 
 that all families of the earth should wish for 
 like blessings (comp. Gen. xlviiii. 20, ‘‘In thee 
 shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as 
 Ephraim and Manasseh”). ‘The words, how- 
 ever, can with no shew of reason be rendered 
 otherwise than as rendered in the Authorized 
 Version, following the LX X. and Vulg. Nor 
 can it be understood otherwise than that all 
 families of men should in some manner de- 
 rive blessing through Abram. ‘The Targum of 
 Onkelos has for thy sake, and so the Jerusa- 
 lem Targum; but this is an unauthorized 
 exposition. 
 
 It is not necessary to assert that the pre- 
 diction here given was such as to enlighten 
 Abram with any full clearness as to the way 
 in which his seed should bless all nations. 
 Indeed the promise is twofold, general and 
 particular. Generally it is true, that Abram’s 
 seed was for centuries the sole depositary 
 of God’s objective revelations, and that that 
 knowledge of God which was confided to 
 them has by them been spread to all na- 
 ticns. ‘Out of Zion went forth the law, 
 
 GENES TS 22k 
 
 ‘[v. 3—6: 
 
 5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, 
 and Lot his brother’s son, and all 
 their substance that they had gather- 
 ed, and the souls that they had gotten 
 in Haran; and they went forth to go 
 into the land of Canaan; and into the 
 land of Canaan they came. 
 
 6 4 And Abram passed through 
 the land unto the place of Sichem, | 
 unto the plain of Moreh. And the 
 Canaanite was then in the land. 
 
 and the word of the Lorp from Jerusalem” 
 (Is. ii. 3). It has indeed been said with truth, 
 that the Semitic nations, and especially the 
 descendants of Abram, were from the time 
 of Abram to Christ the only believers in the 
 unity of the Godhead, and that ever since the 
 Christian era they only have taught mono- 
 theism to mankind, But that which was the 
 special blessing to Abram’s race, has also, 
 springing from that race, become the universal 
 blessing to mankind. Of him “as concerning 
 the flesh Christ came.” 
 
 4. seventy and five years old] See on ch, 
 pa 
 
 5. the souls that they had gotten| that 
 is, the slaves or dependants whom they had 
 attached to them. So in Ezek. xxvii. 13, 
 slaves are spoken of as ‘‘souls of men.” On- 
 kelos renders, ‘‘’‘The souls which they had 
 converted to the law in Charran.” So the 
 Pseudo-Jonathan and Jerusalem ‘Targums 
 render, ‘‘the souls whom they had prose- 
 lyted.” And following this tradition, Rashi 
 says that Abram made proselytes of the men 
 and Sarai of the women. 
 
 into the land of Canaan they came| Leav- 
 ing Haran they must have crossed the river 
 Euphrates, from which crossing it is very 
 commonly supposed the name Hebrew was 
 derived (rendered by the LXX. in Gen. xiv. 
 13, 6 meparns, the crosser over). ‘Thence their 
 course must have been southward over the 
 desert, probably near to Mount Lebanon, and 
 thence to the neighbourhood of Damascus. 
 Josephus (‘ Ant.’ I. 7) quotes from Nicolaus 
 of Damascus (‘ Hist.’ bk. Iv.), ‘* Abraham 
 reigned in Damascus, being come with an 
 army from the country beyond Babylon called 
 the land of the Chaldeans. But not long 
 after, leaving this country with his people he 
 migrated into the land of Canaan, which is 
 now called Judea.” Josephus adds, that the 
 name of Abraham was even in his days famous 
 in the country of the Damascenes, and a vil- 
 lage was pointed out there, which was called 
 Abraham’s habitation. 
 
 6. the place of Sichem] So named by 
 anticipation. ‘The word place may perhaps 
 indicate that the town did not yet exist, 
 
v. 7, 8.] 
 
 7 And the Lorp appeared unto 
 
 e chap. 13. Abram, and said, ‘Unto thy seed will 
 
 I give this land: and there builded he 
 
 It is generally supposed that Sychar (Joh, iv. 
 5) is the name by which it was known 
 among the later Samaritans, though the iden- 
 tity of Sychar with Shechem is not quite 
 certain (see Smith’s ‘Dict. of the Bible,’ Art. 
 ‘Sychar’), ‘The word Shechem signifies a 
 shoulder, and, unless the town derived its 
 name from Shechem the son of Hamor, it 
 probably was situated on a shoulder or ridge 
 of land connected with the hills of Ebal and 
 Gerizim. Josephus (‘ Ant,’ Iv, 8) describes 
 the city of Shechem or Sicima as lying be- 
 tween Gerizim on the right and Ebal on the 
 left. ‘The name Neapolis was given to it by 
 Vespasian; and the ancients clearly identify 
 the later Neapolis with the ancient Shechem; 
 e.g. Epiphanius (‘ Her.’ m1. 1055), ‘‘In Si- 
 chem, that is in the present Neapolis,” ‘The 
 modern name is Nabulus, The situation of 
 the town is described by modern travellers 
 as one of exceeding beauty. Dr Robinson 
 writes, ‘‘All at once the ground sinks down 
 to a valley running toward the West, with a 
 soil of rich black vegetable mould. Here a 
 scene of luxuriant and almost unparalleled 
 verdure burst upon our view. ‘The whole 
 valley was filled with gardens of vegetables 
 and orchards of all kinds of fruits, watered 
 by several fountains which burst forth in 
 various parts and flow westward in refreshing 
 streams, It came suddenly upon us like a 
 scene of fairy enchantment, we saw nothing 
 to compare to it in all Palestine” (Vol. 1. 
 p. 275. See also Stanley’s ‘Sinai and Pales- 
 tine,’ p. 234.) This spot, probably not yet 
 so cultivated, but even then verdant and 
 beautiful, was the first dwellingplace of the 
 Patriarch in the land of promise, 
 
 the plain of Moreh] . The oak (or tere- 
 binth) of Moreh, ‘There is considerable 
 variety of opinion as to the nature of the 
 tree here mentioned, called E/on in He- 
 brew. Celsius (‘ Hierob,’ I, p. 34) has ar- 
 gued that all the cognate words, £/, Elon, 
 Elah, &c, signify the terebinth tree, the word 
 allon only being the oak. So Michaelis 
 (‘Supplem,’ p, 72), Rosenm., Delitzsch, 
 Keil, &c, ‘The question is discussed at great 
 length by Gesen, (‘ Thes,’ p. 50), who doubts 
 the distinction between d//on and Elon (a dis- 
 tinction merely of vowel points), and inter- 
 prets both by oak, or perhaps generally a /arge 
 forest tree. ‘The LXX. and Vulg. render oak. 
 The Targums (followed by the English Ver- 
 sion) render plain (see also Stanley, ‘Sinai 
 and Palestine,’ p. 141). It may be a ques- 
 tion also whether the oak of Moreh was a 
 single tree, or whether the word used may be 
 a noun of multitude, signifying the oak grove, 
 A single tree of large size and spreading 
 
 GEN STS; cai 
 
 an altar unto the Lorp, who ap- 4 chap. 13. 
 
 peared unto him. 
 8 And he removed from thence 
 
 foliage would, no doubt, be a natural resting 
 place for a caravan or Arab encampment in 
 the desert; but the great fertility of the val- 
 ley of Shechem favours the belief that there 
 may have been a grove rather than a single 
 tree, Nothing is known as to the meaning of 
 the word Moreh: it may have probably been 
 the name of a man, a prince of the land, or 
 owner of the property. 
 
 the Canaanite was then in the land| The 
 original settlement of the sons of Canaan 
 seems to have been in the South near the Red 
 Sea; a Semitic race probably occupied the 
 regions of Palestine and Phoenicia; a colony 
 of the Canaanites afterwards spreading north- 
 wards, partly dispossessed and partly mingled 
 with the ancient Shemite inhabitants, and 
 adopted their language (see note on ch, x. 6, 
 see also Epiphan, ‘ Heres,’ LXvi.n. 84). The 
 historian therefore most appropriately relates 
 that, at the time of the emigration of Abram 
 and his followers, the Canaanite was already 
 in possession of the land. The conjecture, 
 therefore, that these words were written by 
 a later hand than that of Moses, after the 
 ancient Canaanite inhabitants had been ex- 
 pelled, is altogether beside the mark, 
 
 7. And the Lorp appeared unto Abram] 
 This is the first mention of a distinct appear- 
 ance of the Lorp to man. His voice is heard 
 by Adam, and He is said to have spoken to 
 Noah and to Abram: but here is a visible 
 manifestation, ‘The following questions na- 
 turally arise, 1. Was this a direct vision 
 of JEHOVAH in Bodily shape? 2, Was 
 it an impression produced on the mind of 
 the seer, but not a true vision of God? 
 3. Was it an angel personating God? 
 4. Was it a manifestation of the Son of 
 God, a Theophania, in some measure anti- 
 cipating the Incarnation? (1) The first 
 question seems answered by St John (Joh. 
 i. 18), ‘*No man hath seen God (the 
 Father) at any time.” (2) The second to 
 a certain extent follows the first. Whether 
 there was a manifestation of an objective 
 reality, or merely an impression on the 
 senses, we cannot possibly judge; but the 
 vision, whether seen in sleep or waking, 
 cannot have been a vision of God the Father. 
 (3) The third question has been answered 
 by many in the affirmative, it being con- 
 cluded that ‘“‘the Angel of the Lorp,” a 
 created Angel, was always the means of com- 
 munication between God and man in the Old 
 Testament. ‘The great supporter of this opi- 
 nion in early times was St Augustine (‘De 
 Trin,’ 111. c, xi. Tom, vil. pp. 805—8I0), 
 the chief arguments in its favour being the 
 statements of the New Testament that the 
 
 IOI 
 
102 
 
 unto a mountain on the east of Beth- 
 el, and pitched his tent, having Bethel 
 on the west, and Hai on the east: 
 
 ~ and there he builded an altar unto the 
 
 Lor», and called upon the name of 
 
 . the Lorp. 
 t Heb. g And Abram journeyed, ‘going on 
 gndjoere Still toward the south. 
 $2h( Ss 10 @ And there was a famine in 
 
 law was given ‘by disposition of angels,” 
 ‘spoken by angels,” &c, (Acts vil. 53; Gal. 
 ili, 19; Heb, ii. 22). It is further argued by 
 the supporters of this view, that ‘‘the angel 
 of the Lorp” is in some passages in the Old 
 ‘Testament, and always in the New ‘Testa- 
 ment, clearly a created angel (e. g. Zech. 1, 11, 
 r2, &c,; Luke i, 11; Acts xii, 23); and that 
 therefore it is not to be supposed that any of 
 these manifestations of the Angel of God or 
 Angel of the Lord, which seem so markedly 
 Divine, should have been anything more than 
 the appearance of a created Angel personating 
 the Most High. (4) The affirmative of the 
 fourth opinion was held by the great majority 
 of the fathers from the very first (see, for in- 
 stance, Justin, ‘ Dial.’ pp. 280—284; Tertull. 
 ‘adv. Prax,’ c. 16; Athanas, ‘Cont. Arian,’ 
 IV. pp. 464, 465 (Ed. Col.); Basil, ‘ adv. 
 Eunom,’ 11. 18; Theodoret, ‘ Qu. V, in Exod,’ 
 The teaching of the fathers on this head is 
 investigated by Bp. Bull, ‘F. N. D.’ Iv. iii. 
 In like manner the ancient Jews had referred 
 the manifestation of God in visible form to the 
 Shechinah, the Metatron, or the Memra de 
 Jah, apparently an emanation from God, hav- 
 ing a semblance of diversity, yet really one 
 with Him, coming forth to reveal Him, but 
 not truly distinct from Him. ‘The fact, that 
 the name Angel of the Lord is sometimes used 
 of a created Angel, is not proof enough that 
 it may not be also used of Him who is called 
 ‘‘the Angel of mighty counsel” (peydAns 
 Bovdjjs "Ayyedos, Is. ix. 6, Sept, Trans.), and 
 ‘the Angel of the covenant” (Mal. iii, 1): 
 and the apparent identification of the Angel 
 of God with God Himself in very many pas- 
 sages (e.g. Gen. xxxll. 24, comp. vv. 28, 30, 
 feereit 3.4... Cen, XVL 10, 13, XIV. 25, 10; 
 Josh.v. 14, vi. 2; Judg. ii, 1, xiii, 22; Isa, vi. 1; 
 cp. Joh, xii, 41; Is, Ixili. 9) leads markedly to 
 the conclusion, that God spake to man by an 
 Angel or Messenger, and yet that that Angel 
 or Messenger was Himself God. No man saw 
 God at any time, but the only begotten Son, 
 who was in the Bosom of the Father, declared 
 Him. He, who was the Word of God, the 
 Voice of God to His creatures, was yet in 
 the beginning with God, and He was God. 
 
 Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there 
 builded he an altar| ‘This is the first definite 
 promise to Abram, that the land of Canaan 
 
 GENESIS. XII. 
 
 [v. 9—12, 
 
 the land: and Abram went down 
 into Egypt to sojourn there; for the 
 famine was grievous in the land. 
 
 1r And it came to pass, when he 
 was come near to enter into Egypt, 
 that he said unto Sarai his wife, Be- 
 hold now, I know that thou arta fair 
 woman to look upon: 
 
 12 Therefore it shall come to pass, 
 
 should be the inheritance of his children. Ac- 
 cordingly, he built an altar there, as conse- 
 crating the soil and dedicating it to God. It 
 is not mentioned that he offered sacrifice, but 
 as the Hebrew word for a/tar means the place 
 of slaughter or of sacrifice, there can be no 
 doubt, that it was an altar of burnt offering, 
 which he built, as was Noah’s altar (ch, viii. 
 20), the only altar spoken of prior to this 
 time, 
 
 8. he removed] lit. he plucked up his 
 tent pegs. ‘The journeying was by repeated 
 encampments, after the manner of the Be- 
 douins. 
 
 Beth-el,| i.e, the House of God. This is 
 by anticipation, It was called Lug at this 
 time (see ch. xxviii. 19; Judg. i. 23). The 
 present name is Beitan. 
 
 Hai] was about five miles to the East of 
 Beth-el, the ruins of which bear the name of 
 Medinet Gai. 
 
 called upon the name of the Lorv,| See ch, 
 iv. 26, 
 
 9. going on still toward the south] 'The 
 words express a gradual change of place, 
 after the nomadic fashion. As food offered 
 itself he pitched his tent and fed his cattle, 
 and when food failed he went onwards to 
 fresh pastures, 
 
 10. a famine] A country like Canaan, 
 imperfectly cultivated, would be very subject 
 to droughts and famine. ‘The part of Egypt, 
 which lay immediately South of Canaan, ap- 
 pears to have been especially fertile. It was 
 at that time inhabited by a people skilled in 
 agriculture, and flooded periodically by the 
 Nile. Egypt is still the refuge for neighbour- 
 ing nations when afflicted with drought. It 
 is said that Abram went down to Egypt ‘to 
 sojourn,” not to live there; for he had re- 
 ceived the promise of inheritance in Canaan, 
 and, though this famine may have tried, it did 
 not shake his faith. 
 
 11, Bebold...thou art a fair woman] Sarai 
 Was now more than sixty years old: but 
 her life extended to 127 years, so that she was 
 only then in middle life; she had borne no 
 children, and at the age of ninety, though not 
 naturally young enough to have a son, was 
 yet preserved in a condition of unusual and 
 
v. 13—19.] 
 
 when the Egyptians shall see thee, 
 that they shall say, This zs his wife: 
 and they will kill me, but they will 
 save thee alive. 
 
 13 Say, I pray thee, thou art my 
 sister: that it may be well with me 
 for thy sake; and my soul shall live 
 because of thee. 
 
 14 {1 And it came to pass, that, 
 when Abram was come into Egypt, 
 the Egyptians beheld the woman that 
 she was very fair. 
 
 15 The princes also of Pharaoh 
 saw her, and commended her before 
 Pharaoh: and the woman was taken 
 into Pharaoh’s house. 
 
 preternatural youth, so that she bore Isaac; 
 her fair complexion would contrast favourably 
 with the swarthy complexion of the Egyptians, 
 The Arab life of Abram naturally made him 
 wary of danger. He was about to sojourn 
 in a country with a despotic government, 
 and among a licentious people. We see in 
 the conduct of Abram an instance of one 
 under the influence of deep religious feeling 
 and true faith in God, but yet with a con- 
 science imperfectly enlightened as to many 
 moral duties, and when leaning to his own 
 understanding suffered to fall into great error 
 and sin. ‘The candour of the historian is 
 shewn by his exhibiting in such strong relief 
 the dissimulation of Abram as contrasted 
 with the straightforward integrity of Pharaoh. 
 
 15. Pbharaoh| The name or title, by 
 which the kings of Egypt are called in the 
 Old‘Testament. Josephus tells us that ‘‘ Pha- 
 raoh among the Egyptians signifies &ing.” 
 It used to be thought that it was the Coptic 
 word Ouro with the article Pi or Ph. (Ja- 
 blonski, Diss, iv. section 3, ‘ De Terra Gosen.,”) 
 Later the opinion of Rosellini, Lepsius, Raw- 
 linson, Poole and others has been that it cor- 
 responded with the title of the Sun-God 
 RA, with the article, PH—R A, a name which 
 was given to some of the kings of Egypt. 
 Gesenius objects to this from its lacking the 
 final of (‘'Thes,’ p. 1129); and there is insuffi- 
 cient evidence that the title was really a 
 common title of the kings, Very recently M. 
 De Rougé has shewn that the hieroglyphic, 
 which is the regular title of the Egyptian 
 kings, and which signifies ‘‘the great house” 
 or ‘‘the double house,” must be read Peraa 
 or Perao. ‘This singularly corresponds with 
 the statement of Horapollo (1, 61), that the 
 king was called ofkos péyas, ‘the great house,” 
 The identity of this with the name Pharaoh 
 is admitted by Brugsch, Ebers (‘ Agypten, 
 &c,’ p. 26), and is argued at length in the 
 
 EINES TSteoe bly 
 
 16 And he entreated Abram’ well 
 for her sake: and he had sheep, and 
 oxen, and he asses, and menservants, 
 and maidservants, and she asses, and 
 camels. 
 
 17 And the Lorp plagued Pharaoh 
 and his house with great plagues be- 
 cause of Sarai Abram’s wife. 
 
 18 And Pharaoh called Abram, 
 and said, What zs this that thou hast 
 done unto me? why didst thou not 
 tell me that she was thy wife? | 
 
 19 Why saidst thou, She 7s my 
 sister? so I might have taken her to 
 me to wife: now therefore behold 
 thy wife, take her, and go thy way. 
 
 ‘*Excursus on Egyptian Words” (by the Rev. 
 F, C. Cook) at the end of this volume, It 
 may be compared with the title ‘Sublime 
 Porte.” 
 
 It is difficult to fix the particular Pharaoh 
 or dynasty under which Abram came into 
 Egypt. Generally the characteristics of the 
 Court, as briefly described in Genesis, point 
 toa native dynasty of very remote date, Some 
 circumstances, the friendly reception of a 
 Semitic nomade and the use of camels (v. 16) 
 among the Egyptians, have suggested the 
 belief that Abram’s Pharaoh must have 
 been a shepherd king (see Smith’s Dict. of the 
 Bible, Artt. Pharaoh and Zoan); and Sir 
 Gardiner Wilkinson (‘ Ancient Egyptians,’ 
 Vol, 1, chap, il. p. 42) has identified him with 
 Apophis or Apepi, the sixth monarch of 
 Manetho’s 15th dynasty. It is, however, 
 impossible to admit so late a date, The 
 Pharaoh of Joseph was almost certainly a 
 king of the rath dynasty, Abram’s Pha- 
 raoh must therefore at latest have been one of 
 the first kings of that same dynasty, if not 
 belonging to a dynasty earlier still, ‘The ob- 
 jections, derived from the camels, and other 
 apparent indications of a shepherd reign, are 
 fully considered in Excursus I, ‘‘On the 
 Bearings of Egyptian History on the Penta- 
 teuch,” at the end of this volume, by Rev. F. 
 C. Cook: and the period of Abram’s sojourn 
 in Egypt is shewn to be most probably under 
 one of the earlier sovereigns of the 12th 
 dynasty, 
 
 the woman was taken into Pharaoh's house] 
 Probably even at that early period Egypt had 
 reached such a pitch of corrupt civilization 
 that the sovereign had a hareem, and Sarai 
 was chosen to be one of his wives, 
 
 18. Pharaoh called Abram] Josephus says, 
 that the priests told Pharaoh for what cause 
 that plague had fallen on him (‘ Ant.’ T, 8), 
 It is more likely that Sarai herself, being 
 
 103 
 
104 
 
 GENES 1S: 
 
 20 And Pharaoh commanded his 
 men concerning him: and they sent 
 him away, and his wife, and all that 
 he had. 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 1 Abram and Lot return out of Egypt. 7 By 
 disagreement they part asunder. 10 Lot goeth 
 to wicked Sodom. 14 God reneweth the pro- 
 mise to Abram. 18 He removeth to Hebron, 
 and there buildeth an altar. 
 
 ND Abram went up out of E- 
 gypt, he, and his wife, and all 
 that he had, and Lot with him, into 
 the south. 
 2 And Abram was very rich in 
 cattle, in silver, and in gold. 
 And he went on his journeys 
 from the south even to Beth-el, unto 
 
 XII. XIIL [v. 20—7. 
 the place where his tent had been at 
 the beginning, between Beth-el and 
 Hai; 
 
 4 Unto the “place of the altar, «chap 1 
 
 which he had made there at the first: 7 
 and there Abram called on the name 
 of the Lorp. ‘ 
 
 5 4 And Lot also, which went 
 with Abram, had flocks, and herds, 
 and tents. : 
 
 6 And the land was not able to 
 bear them, that they might dwell to- 
 gether: for their substance was great, 
 so that they could not dwell toge- 
 ther. 
 
 7 And there was a strife between 
 the herdmen of Abram’s cattle and 
 the herdmen of Lot’s cattle: and the 
 
 interrogated about it, confessed the truth 
 (Patrick). 
 
 19. so I might have taken her| Heb. So 
 I took her, LXX. Syr, Onk. Though the 
 Vulgate followed by the Arabic has, ‘‘so that 
 I might have taken her.” ‘The meaning is, 
 Deceived by Abram’s words, Pharaoh took 
 her with the intention of making her his wife, 
 but was hindered from doing so by the afflic- 
 tions with which God visited him (see Theo- 
 doret, ‘Qu. LX XII. in Gen.’ Op, xm. Au- 
 gustin, ‘De Civit. Dei,’ xviI.18). St Jerome 
 (‘ Trad, Heb, in Genes,”) refers to Esth, ii. 12, 
 where we learn that the custom of Eastern 
 monarchs was, that a maiden should undergo 
 twelvemonths of purification before she was 
 actually taken to wife. It was, he thinks, 
 during some such period that Pharaoh was 
 plagued and prohibited from marrying Sarai. 
 It deserves to be noticed, that throughout the 
 history of the chosen race, Egypt was to them 
 the scene of spiritual danger, of covetousness 
 and love of riches, of worldly security, of 
 temptation to rest on an arm of flesh, on 
 man’s Own understanding, and not on God 
 only, All this appears from the very first, in 
 Abraham’s sojourn there, Sarai’s danger, their 
 departure full of wealth and prosperity, 
 
 CHAP, XIII. 1. and Lot with him] 
 Lot is not mentioned in the descent into 
 Egypt, because no part of the narrative there 
 concerns him, On the return to Canaan he 
 becomes a principal actor, 
 
 into the south] ‘That southern part of Ca- 
 naan, whence he had gone down into Egypt, 
 The south, or Neged, is almost a proper name, 
 
 2. very rich| He had-.grown rich in 
 Egypt. He has now to experience some of 
 the dangers and evils of prosperity, 
 
 3. on his journeys] By his stations, or 
 according to his encampments, z.e. either sta- 
 tion by station, as before, pitching his tent for 
 a time at one station and then removing it to 
 another; or perhaps, returning by his former 
 stations, according to his original encamp- 
 ments when he was journeying southwards, 
 
 unto the place where his tent had been at the 
 beginning] Shechem was the first place at 
 which he rested and built an altar; but he 
 probably remained there a comparatively short 
 time. ‘The Canaanites then in the land (ch, 
 xii. 6) would doubtless have occupied all the 
 most fertile country about Shechem, His 
 second place of sojourn was the mountain 
 near Bethel, where he is said to have built an 
 altar and called on the name of the Lord, and 
 where very probably he had continued until 
 the famine began to prevail, (See ch, xii, vv, 
 7, 8,9, 10.) 
 
 6. the land was not able to bear them] 
 Lot was the sharer of Abram’s prosperity. 
 ‘They came up out of Egypt with much larger — 
 possessions than before, more ‘‘ flocks and herds 
 and tents” for their now more numerous re- 
 tainers, ‘The land too had but just recovered 
 from a state of drought and dearth: ‘‘ and the 
 Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelt then in the 
 land” (v. 7), and probably by their occupa- 
 tion contributed to the scarcity of pasture, 
 
 7. Perizzite| But little is known of 
 this people. ‘They are not mentioned in the 
 catalogue of nations in Gen, x, They are 
 mostly coupled, as here, with the Canaanites, 
 They appear from Josh, xi, 3, xvii. 15, to have 
 dwelt in the woods and mountains, Bochart 
 describes them (‘Phaleg.’ Iv. 36) as a rustic, 
 agrarian race, living’ without cities and in 
 villages only, the name itself signifying pagani, 
 villagers, rustics, = 
 
[eb. 
 n bres 
 ren. 
 
 v. 8—15.| 
 
 Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled 
 then in the land. 
 
 8 And Abram said unto Lot, 
 Let there be no strife, I pray thee, 
 between me and thee, and between 
 my herdmen and thy herdmen; for 
 we de ‘brethren. 
 
 g Is not the whole land before 
 thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, 
 from me: if thou wilt take the left 
 hand, then I will go to the right; or 
 if thou depart to the right hand, then 
 I will go to the left. 
 
 ro And Lot lifted up his eyes, and 
 beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it 
 was well watered every where, before 
 the Lorp destroyed Sodom and Go- 
 
 GENESIS. XIII. 
 
 11 Then Lot chose him all the 
 plain of Jordan; and Lot journeyed 
 east: and they separated themselves 
 the one from the other. 
 
 12 Abram dwelled in the land of 
 Canaan, and Lot dwelled in the cities 
 of the plain, and pitched /zs tent to- 
 ward Sodom. 
 
 13 But the men of Sodom were 
 wicked and sinners before the Lorp 
 exceedingly. 
 
 14 @ And the Lorp said unto A- 
 bram, after that Lot was separated 
 from him, Lift up now thine eyes, 
 and look from the place where thou 
 art northward, and southward, and 
 eastward, and westward: 
 
 105 
 
 morrah, even as the garden of the 
 Lorp, like the land of Egypt, as thou 
 
 comest unto Zoar. 
 
 15 For all the land which thou Be 12. 
 seest, to thee will I give it, and to %4 
 Deut. 34. 
 thy seed for ever. - 
 
 eee ee ee ee Ne ee ee ee 
 
 dwelled then in the land| See on xii. 6. 
 
 8. Let there be no strife] A noble ex- 
 ample of disinterestedness and love of peace 
 exhibited by the father of the faithful. 
 
 10. Lot lifted up his eyes] They were 
 probably encamped on that mountain on the 
 east of Bethel, having Bethel on the west and 
 Hai on the east, where Abram had built 
 the altar and called on the name of the Lord 
 (ch, xii. 8), The very spot can be traced 
 from the indications of the sacred text (Stan- 
 ley’s ‘ Jewish Church,’ Vol. 1. p. 32). From 
 this spot Lot and Abram chose their re- 
 spective possessions. Lot saw the plains of 
 Jordan, watered by fertilizing rivers, not yet 
 broken up by the overflowing or outbursting 
 of the great salt lake, very probably irrigated 
 like the land of Egypt which he had lately 
 left, where the Nile refreshed the soil, and the 
 plague of famine never came. ‘Taking no 
 warning by the dangers, bodily and spiritual, 
 which had beset them in Egypt, he feared not 
 the proximity of the wealthy and luxurious 
 inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, but 
 thought their land pleasant even as the garden 
 of the Lord. He chose the rich pastures of 
 the plain, and left Abram the less promis- 
 ing, but, as it proved, the safer inheritance of 
 the hill country of Juda, It was a selfish 
 choice, and it proved a sad one. 
 
 as thou comest unto Zoar| See on ch, xiv, 3. 
 12. land of Canaan| ‘That is, Canaan 
 strictly so called. 
 
 the plain] Lit. ‘the circuit or neighbour- 
 hood,” the country round about Jordan, So 
 the LXX. (Ges. ‘Thes.’ p. 717. Stanley, 
 ‘Sinai and Palestine,’ p: 287.) ‘The low tract 
 
 or plain along the river—through which it 
 flows, perhaps as comprehensive as the Ghor 
 itself, (Robinson, ‘Phys. Geog.’ p. 7 a) 
 
 13. sinners before the Lorp|] Sodom, 
 Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboim are men- 
 tioned, Gen, x. 19, as among the first settle- 
 ments of the Canaanites. ‘The fertility of the 
 soil in this Valley of the Jordan, with the 
 luxurious and enervating character of the 
 climate, rapidly developed the sensual vices 
 of this early civilized but depraved race, ‘Their 
 wickedness is mentioned here perhaps in anti- 
 cipation of the history in ch, xix., but partly 
 also in order to exhibit more clearly the 
 thoughtlessness and worldliness of Lot in 
 choosing their neighbourhood for his resi- 
 dence, as distinguished from the humility and 
 unselfish spirit of Abram. 
 
 14, Lift up now thine eyes, &c.] He was 
 probably still on the hill east of Bethel. Here 
 once again, on his return from Egypt to the 
 land of his inheritance, God renews his pro- 
 mise to Abram. The world, with its dan- 
 gers and its honours, may have tempted 
 Abram, but it had not corrupted him, He 
 came back from Egypt with larger knowledge, 
 probably all the more armed against sin by 
 having had some experience of its seductions, 
 He is still the chosen of God; and he is com- 
 forted under separation from his kinsman, and 
 the discovery of that kinsman’s lower motives 
 and less disinterestedness, by the assurance 
 that God was still ever with him and pledged 
 to preserve and provide for him. | 
 
 15. to thee] ‘The land even in present 
 possession was ‘his, so far as was needed by 
 him as a nomade chief, though its permanent 
 occupation was to him and his seed after him, 
 
106 
 
 t Heb. 
 plains. 
 
 { 
 
 GENYES ls: 
 
 16 And I will make thy seed as 
 the dust of the earth: so that if a man 
 can number the dust of the earth, then 
 shall thy seed also be numbered. 
 
 17 Arise, walk through the land in 
 the length of it and in the breadth 
 of it; for I will give it unto thee. 
 
 18 Then Abram removed /is tent, 
 and came and dwelt in the ‘plain 
 of Mamre, which zs in Hebron, and 
 built there an altar unto the Lorp. 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 1 The battle of four kings against five. 12 Lot 
 is taken prisoner. 14 Abram rescueth him. 
 
 — 
 
 Jor ever] i.e. in perpetuity. But, when we 
 consider that the promises to Abram have 
 their full completion in Christ, to whom are 
 given ‘‘the uttermost parts of the earth for a 
 possession,” there need be no limit to the sense 
 of the words “ for ever.” 
 
 18. the plain of Mamre] The Oaks (or 
 terebinths) of Mamre, see on ch. xii, 6, Pro- 
 bably it means ‘‘the oak grove” or ‘‘ wood 
 of Mamre,” called after Mamre the Amorite, 
 the friend andally of Abram (ch. xiv. 13,24). 
 
 Hebron] Called Arba or Kirjath-arba (see 
 ch, xxii, 2, xxxv. 4. Judg. 1, ro) till after the 
 death of Moses, when Caleb took the city 
 and changed its name to Hebron, It has been 
 thought therefore that the words here ‘‘ which 
 is Hebron,” must have been inserted by a 
 later hand than that of Moses, It is more 
 probable that Hebron was the original name, 
 changed to Kirjath-arba during the sojourn 
 of the descendants of Jacob in the land of 
 Egypt, and restored by Caleb at the conquest 
 of Palestine. So Karme (cited by Rosen- 
 miiller), Hengstenberg, Keil, &c.; see also on 
 ch, xxiii, 2, ‘This was the third resting place 
 of Abram: 1, Shechem, 2, Bethel, 3. He- 
 bron, Near it was the cave of Machpelah, 
 where he and Sarah were buried, It is now 
 called E/ Khalil, ‘‘ the friend,” 7, e. the house 
 of the friend of God, Near to it stands an 
 ancient ‘Terebinth, once a place of heathen 
 worship (Delitzsch). ‘The cave of Machpe- 
 lah still is there, surrounded by a mosque, in 
 which lie probably the dust of Abraham and 
 Isaac, and perhaps the embalmed body, the 
 mummy, of Jacob, brought up in solemn 
 state from Egypt, ch. 1], 13 (Stanley, ‘Sinai 
 and Palestine,’ p, 102). 
 
 Cuap. XIV.1. And it came to pass| We 
 come now upon a new scene in the life 
 of Abram. ‘The choice of Lot was soon 
 seen not to be a wise choice, even for earthly 
 happiness. ‘The rich plains of Sodom and 
 Gomorrah were likely to be scenes of strife, 
 
 A Ae LV 
 
 18 Melchizedek blesseth Abram. 20 Abram 
 giveth him tithe, 22 The rest of the spoil, his 
 partners having had their portions, he re- 
 storeth to the king of Sodom. 
 
 vA D it came to pass in the days 
 of Amraphel king of Shinar, 
 Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlao- 
 mer king of Elam, and Tidal king 
 of nations; | 
 
 2 That these made war with Bera 
 king of Sodom, and with Birsha king 
 of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Ad- 
 mah, and Shemeber king of Zeboiim, 
 and the king of Bela, which is 
 
 Zoar. 
 
 [v. 162, 
 
 as in early times was the case with all fertile 
 countries (Thucyd. I. 2). ‘The history of this 
 war is a remarkable episode, and is thought 
 by many to be a very ancient document in- 
 corporated by Moses in his great work. So 
 Tuch, Ewald, Kurtz,:&c. who all bear tes- 
 timony to its internal proofs of historical ac- 
 curacy. ‘The occurrence of the name JEHO- 
 VAH in it is inconsistent with the theory, 
 which assigns the use of that name only to 
 the later portions of the book of Genesis. 
 
 in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar] 
 The king of Shinar, (Babel, Onkel., Bagdad, 
 Arab. Erpen., Pontus, Jonathan,) as being the 
 representative of Nimrod, founder of the 
 great Babylonian Empire, is mentioned first. 
 ‘The name Amraphel is probably Assyrian, its 
 derivation unknown, 
 
 Arioch| If, as it is supposed, the root of 
 this word be ari, a Jion, the bearer of it would 
 appear tc have been Semitic. 
 
 Ellasar] Jonathan Telassar (see 2 K. xix. 
 12; Isa. xxxvil. 12), a place not far off. It is 
 more probably identified with Larsa or La- 
 rancha, the Larissa of the Greeks, a town in 
 Lower Babylonia, or Chaldza, between Ur 
 and Erech, on the left bank of the Euphrates 
 (Rawlinson, Kalisch, &c.). 
 
 Chedorlaomer king of Elam| It seems 
 from the narrative that at this time the king 
 of Elam was the most powerful of the Asiatic 
 princes (Le Clerc), ‘The Elamites appear to 
 have been originally a Semitic people (ch. x. 
 22). If then they had now gained a superi- 
 ority over the Hamitic races, it is not impro- 
 bable that the Canaanites of the plain of Jor- 
 dan, having been originally subject to the 
 kings of Shinar, or Babylon, bore unwillingly 
 the transference of their fealty to the Shemite 
 king of Elam, and took the first opportunity 
 of throwing off their allegiance, whereupon 
 the king of Elam, now the head of the four 
 kingdoms named in this verse, gathered his 
 subjects or tributary allies, and strove to re- 
 duce the Canaanites again to subjection, Re- 
 
y. 3—5.] 
 
 3 All these were joined together 
 ‘in the vale of Siddim, which is the 
 salt sea. 
 
 4 Twelve years they served Che- 
 dorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year 
 
 they rebelled. 
 
 cent discoveries shew that Susa (the capital 
 of Elymais) must have been one of the most 
 ancient cities of the East. Sir Henry Rawlin- 
 son thought he discovered a name corespond- 
 ing with Chedorlaomer on Chaldzan bricks, 
 viz. Kadur-Mapula, the second portion of the 
 word being of course distinct. Another title 
 by which Kadur-Mapula was known was 
 “Ravager of the West,” which corresponds 
 with the account here given of Chedorlaomer. 
 Rawlinson and others consider the dynasty 
 of Chedorlaomer not to have been Semitic, 
 but belonging to a race of Hamites, who had 
 subdued the original Elymzans. 
 
 Tidal king of nations| Symmachus renders 
 ‘King of the Scythians,” which is approved 
 by some commentators, because Scythia was 
 inhabited by many different tribes (Fuller, 
 “ Miscell. SS.’ Lib. 11. c. 4, quoted by Rosenm.). 
 Le Clerc, followed by Rosenmiiller, prefers 
 Galilee, called ‘‘ Galilee of the Gentiles” or 
 Simmons (ls) Ix, 1; Matt. iv. x5. See 
 also Strabo, Lib. xvi. § 34, who says that 
 these northern parts of Judza were inhabited 
 by various mixed tribes, Egyptians, Arabs, 
 Pheenicians), But all this was probably later 
 in history, and the name Galilee of the na- 
 tions was given to Galilee, because it was still 
 inhabited by other tribes, whilst Judza was 
 inhabited by none but Israelites (Gesenius, 
 ‘Thes.’ p. 272). We may most probably 
 conjecture that Tidal was owned as the chief 
 of several nomade tribes, who, like Abram, 
 had nostationary home, For Tidal, the LX X, 
 has Thargal, which is preferred by some, as 
 having the meaning of ‘‘ Great chief” in the 
 early Hamitic dialect of the lower Tigris and 
 Euphrates country (Rawlinson, in Smith’s 
 ‘Dict. of Bible’). 
 
 8. wale of Siddim| ‘The meaning of 
 this name has been a great puzzle to inter- 
 preters. ‘The LXX. render it ‘the salt val- 
 ley.” Onkelos evidently refers the derivation 
 to Sadeh, a plain (as though OO was plural 
 of MY). So Aquila and Rashi. They 
 are followed by Stanley (‘Sinai and Palestine,’ 
 p- 491). Aben Ezra derives it from Sid 
 (1), lime, because of the abundance of 
 bitumen, which was used as lime (see ch. xi. 
 3). Gesenius suggests an Arabic root signi- 
 fying an obstacle, and so concludes that the 
 valley of Siddim was a plain full of rocky 
 valleys and irregularities. In v. ro it is said 
 to be full of bitumen pits, which was perhaps 
 
 GENESIS. XIV. 
 
 5 And in the fourteenth year came 
 Chedorlaomer, and the kings that 
 were with him, and smote the Re- 
 
 ‘phaims in Ashteroth Karnaim, and, , ,,, 
 the Zuzims in Ham, and the Emims plain of 
 7rza- 
 
 in 'Shaveh Kiriathaim, 
 
 — 
 
 the reason why the five kings chose it for the 
 field of battle, as being more favourable to 
 the weaker party. 
 
 which is the salt sea| ‘The extreme de- 
 pression of the Dead Sea, 1316 feet (Robinson, 
 ‘Phys. Geog.’ p. 190), and other geological 
 phenomena, are thought to favour the belief, 
 that there must have been originally some 
 lake at the extremity of the valley of the Jor- 
 dan; but perhaps after the destruction of 
 Sodom and Gomorrah the lake greatly ex- 
 tended itself, so as to cover much which be- 
 fore may have been low valley land. The 
 vale of Siddim is generally thought to have 
 
 been at the southern extremity of the Dead 
 
 Sea, where are now to be seen the principal 
 deposits of salt and bitumen, the site being 
 occupied by the shallow southern portion of 
 that sea (see Robinson, ‘ Physical Geography 
 of the Holy Land,’ pp. 73, 213). 
 
 4. Twelve years, &c.] See on v. r. 
 
 5. Rephaims| ‘The LXX. renders “ Gi- 
 ants,” so virtually do Onk. and Syr. It is, 
 no doubt, the name of an ancient people; 
 very probably a tribe resident in the Holy 
 Land before the immigration of the Canaan- 
 ites. ‘They appear to have been a people of 
 large stature. Og, the king of Bashan, at the 
 time of the Exodus, is mentioned as the last 
 remaining of their race (Deut. lil, rr). Their 
 habitation was to the north-east of the valley 
 of the Jordan, the country afterwards called 
 Perea. ‘They must also have extended to the 
 south-west; for the valley of Rephaim, named 
 after them, appears to have been in the neigh- 
 bourhood of the valley of Hinnom and Beth- 
 lehem, to the south of Jerusalem (see Josh. 
 KV Oe RVI EO ne 20m Ve tye 22.) XENI TS), 
 The name ‘‘ Rephaim,” in later times, is con- 
 stantly used for ‘‘the dead,” or rather for the 
 ‘‘ shosts or manes of the dead” (Job xxvi. 5; 
 PsMixsxviis 112 Proveitc is ¢ ise-xiv. 9, XXvI. 
 14). Whether there is a connection between 
 the name of this ancient and afterwards 
 extinct people, and this word thus used for 
 ‘‘the dead,” is very doubtful (Gesen. ‘ Thes.’ 
 Pp. 1302). 
 
 Ashteroth Karnaim] ‘‘ Ashteroth of the 
 two horns.” It is most probable that this 
 was the same as the Ashtaroth, where Og the 
 king of Bashan dwelt (Deut. i. 4; Josh. ix. 
 ro), in the east of the inheritance of the tribe 
 of Manasseh; and that it was named from the 
 worship of Astarte (Ashtoreth), whose image 
 
 ‘107 
 
 thaim. 
 
108 
 
 6 And the Horites in their mount 
 Seir, unto | E]-paran, which zs by the 
 
 of Paran. wilderness. 
 
 7 And they returned, and came to 
 
 GEW ESIS: Xi. 
 
 [v. 6, 7. 
 
 En-mishpat, which zs Kadesh, and 
 smote all the country of the Ama- 
 lekites, and also the Amorites, that 
 dwelt in Hazezon-tamar. 
 
 was such as to suggest the idea of a horned 
 figure (see Gesen. ‘’Thes.’ p. 1082). In like 
 manner Athor (the Egyptian Venus, as As- 
 tarte was the Phoenician) was depicted with 
 horns like a cow (see Rawlinson’s ‘ Herod.’ 
 Vol. Il. pp. 61, 62). Some, however, think 
 the two horns to refer to two hills, between 
 which the city lay, and the name “horned” 
 was intended to distinguish this town from 
 the city commonly called Ashtaroth only (see 
 Rosenm, in loc. and Smith’s ‘ Dict. of Bible,’ 
 s. v. Ashtaroth). 
 
 Zuzims| Little is known concerning the 
 name or place of this people. ‘The LX X. and 
 Onk. render ‘the strong or mighty ones.” 
 Le Clerc thinks the name means ‘“ wanderer,” 
 from the root Zuz fit, ‘to move oneself.” 
 Michaelis understands ‘‘ dwarfs.” Both deri- 
 vations are rejected by Gesen. (‘ Thes.’ p. 410). 
 They are very generally thought to be the 
 same with the Zamzummims (Deut. ii. 20), 
 who are spoken of as a race of great stature, 
 and connected with the Horim, as are the 
 Zuzims here. 
 
 in Ham] If the Zuzim be the same as the 
 Zamzummim, they must have dwelt in the 
 territory of the Ammonites, and Tuch, fol- 
 lowed by Knobel, considers that Ham here is 
 the same as Rabbath-Ammon. ‘There is an- 
 other reading in seven Samaritan MSS. fol- 
 lowed by the LXX. and Vulg. viz. (O92 dua 
 avrois, cum illis) ‘* with them;” but the point- 
 ing of the Masorites seems more likely to be 
 the true. 
 
 the Emims| ‘The name is supposed to be 
 the Hebrew for “terrible ones,” ‘The Rev. 
 F, C. Cook identifies the name with Amu, 
 the Egyptian word for nomad Semites, In 
 Deut. ii. ro, rr, where they are mentioned in 
 the same connection as here, they are spoken 
 of as ‘‘a people great and many and tall.” 
 ‘They dwelt in the country afterwards occu- 
 pied by the Moabites, 
 
 Shaveh Kiriathaim] or ‘the plain of Kiria- 
 thaim,” or ‘‘the plain of the two cities,” Kiri- 
 athaim is mentioned, Num, xxxii. 37, Josh, 
 xill, 19, aS in the possession of the sons of 
 Reuben. Eusebius says it was well known in 
 his day, a village inhabited by Christians, 
 close to the Baris, about 1o miles west of 
 Medeba (‘Onom,’ Kiprabteip). 
 
 6. the Horites in their mount Seir] The 
 name ‘‘ Horites” means ‘‘inhabitants of caves,” 
 These people dwelt in the mountain region 
 called Seir (lit. ‘‘the hirsute,” probably from 
 its thick forests and brushwood), extending 
 
 ‘the Arabs, 
 
 from the Dead Sea southward to the Elamitic 
 Gulf. Mount Seir is called in the Samaritan 
 Pentateuch and the Jerusalem Targum ‘“‘Ga- 
 bla,” and the northern part of the range is 
 still called ‘ Jebal,” or ‘the mountain,” by 
 ‘The wonderful excavations in the 
 rocks near Petra may very possibly be due to 
 these ‘‘ Horim,” or cave-dwellers. ‘They were 
 driven out by the Edomites (Deut. ii, 12), 
 who also after the manner of their predeces- 
 sors ‘‘ made their nest high like the eagle.” 
 
 El-paran] i.e. ‘‘the oak or terebinth wood 
 of Paran.” ‘The great wilderness, extending 
 to the south of Palestine, the south-west of 
 Idumza, and thence to the Sinaitic range, 
 appears to have been called the wilderness of 
 Paran, It probably lay to the west of the 
 wilderness of Sin, but at times is to be taken 
 in a wider sense, as comprehending the desert 
 of Sin (see Gesen, ‘ Thes,’ pp. 47, 1090). El- 
 paran is here said to be by the wilderness, i.e. 
 on the eastern side of the great desert, mark- 
 ing the farthest point to which the expedition 
 of Chedorlaomer reached, ‘The wilderness of 
 Paran is identified with the modern desert of 
 El-Tih, the wilderness of Zin or Sin being the 
 Wady-el-Arabah (Stanley, ‘Sinai and Pales- 
 tine,’ p. 92). 
 
 7. to En-mishpat, which is Kadesh| The 
 LXX. renders ‘to the well of judgment,” 
 the Vulg. ‘‘to the well of Mishpat.” Some 
 suppose it to have derived its name from 
 the judgment pronounced on Moses and Aaron 
 (Num, xx. 12), and that the name is here 
 given proleptically; but it is evidently here 
 given as the ancient name to which the more 
 modern Kadesh corresponded, Syr., Onk., 
 Jerus, render Kadesh by Rekam. Josephus 
 calls it Arekem, which he says now bears the 
 
 name of Petra (‘ A. J.’ Iv. 4). ‘This identity 
 
 of Kadesh with Petra is ably defended by 
 Dean Stanley (‘S. and P.’ pp. 94, 95). An- 
 other site for the ancient Kades, or Ain-Mish- 
 pat, is vindicated for Kudes or Kades, lying 
 to the east of the highest part of Djebel- 
 Halal, about 12 miles to the E.S.E. of Mor- 
 lakhi (see Williams, ‘Holy City,’ Vol. 1. p. 
 467; Kalisch, Delitzsch, Keil, inloc.) Strong 
 objections to both these sites are urged in the 
 art. Kades in Smith’s ‘ Dict. of the Bible.’ 
 
 Amalekites| See note on ch, xxxvi, 12, 
 
 Hazezon-tamar] i.e. ‘The pruning of the 
 palm,” the same place which was afterwards 
 called Engedi, “the fountain of the wild-goat” 
 (2 Chr, xx. 2), The palm-groves, which gave 
 the original name, and for which Pliny says 
 Engedi was famous (‘ Nat, Hist.’ v. 17), have 
 
v. 8—15.] 
 
 8 And there went out the king of 
 Sodom, and the king of Gomorrah, 
 and the king of Admah, and the king 
 of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela 
 (the same zs Zoar;) and they joined 
 battle with them in the vale of Sid- 
 dim ; 
 
 g With Chedorlaomer the king of 
 Elam, and with Tidal king of nations, 
 and Amraphel king of Shinar, and 
 Arioch king of Ellasar; four kings 
 with five. 
 
 10 And the vale of Siddim was full 
 of slimepits ; and the kings of Sodom 
 and Gomorrah fled, and fell there; 
 and they that remained fled to the 
 mountain. 
 
 Ir And they took all the goods of 
 
 disappeared, but the ibex, or Syrian chamois, 
 still inhabits the cliffs in the neighbourhood 
 (Stanley, ‘S. and P.’ p. 295). The place was 
 situated in the wilderness of Juda, to the 
 west of the Dead Sea, according to Josephus 
 300 Stadia from Jerusalem (‘ Ant,’ Ix. c. 1), 
 The ruins found at a place called Ain Jiddi, 
 with a fountain in the midst of a mountain 
 country, to the west of the Dead Sea and of 
 about the latitude of Hebron, are supposed to 
 mark the original site of Engedi or Hazezon- 
 tamar, 
 
 10. slimepits| Bitumen-pits: of asphalt 
 or bitumen, from which the Dead Sea was 
 afterwards called Lacus Asphaltites, or Sea of 
 Asphalt. 
 
 Jell there] i.e. were overthrown there; for 
 the king of Sodom seems to have been one of 
 those who fled to the mountains and escaped, 
 see v, 17, 
 
 13. one that had escaped] Rather those 
 that escaped (Ew. 277; Ges, ‘Thes,’ 
 p. 1I05). 
 
 the Hebrew] i.e. either ‘‘the descendant of 
 Eber,” which seems most accordant with the 
 words in ch, x. 21, where Eber seems to have 
 given a general name to his descendants, or 
 (as the LX X., Aq., Vulg., and most ancient 
 interpreters), ‘‘ the stranger from beyond the 
 Euphrates,” an appellative from the Hebrew 
 noun or preposition Her, 13Y, signifying the 
 ‘‘ opposite side, beyond.” The mention of 
 Abram as the Hebrew is due to the fact, 
 that the messenger, who came and told him 
 what had happened, was an inhabitant of the 
 land, and Abram was to him one of a strange 
 country and strange race. 
 
 the plain} The oaks or oak groves, 
 
 14. He armed his trained servants] He led 
 out his trained servants, The verb 
 
 Ser IECIN) Lone ae V8 
 
 Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their 
 victuals, and went their way. 
 
 12 And they took Lot, Abram’s 
 brother’s son, who dwelt in Sodom, 
 and his goods, and departed. 
 
 13 4 And there came one that had 
 escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew; 
 for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre 
 the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and 
 brother of Aner: and these were con- 
 federate with Abram. 
 
 14 And when Abram heard that 
 his brother was taken captive, he 
 "armed his !trained servants, born in his 1 or, 
 own house, three hundred and eigh- 
 teen, and pursued them unto Dan. 
 
 15 And he divided himself against 
 them, he and his servants, by night, 
 
 here used means ‘‘to draw out,” as a sword 
 from its sheath: and the word trained is ap- 
 plied to the teaching of children (Prov. xxii. 6), 
 and to initiation or consecration, as of a house 
 (Deut. xx. 5), or a temple (1 K, viii. 63). 
 
 born in his own house| Of his own patriarch- 
 al family, not bought, hired, or taken in war. 
 
 unto Dan] Some taking this Dan to be the 
 same as Laish, which was not called Dan till 
 after the country was conquered by the 
 Danites (Josh. xix. 47; Judg. xvili, 29), have 
 thought that this passage was not from the 
 hand of Moses, So Ewald (‘ Gesch,’I. 53), who 
 supposes Dan to have been substituted by a 
 later hand for Laish in the original MS, Others 
 have thought that another place was meant 
 here (so Deyling, Hivernick, Kalisch, Keil). 
 Keil contends that the Dan, formerly called 
 Laish, which was on the central source of the 
 Jordan (see Joseph, ‘Ant.’ I. 10; Stanley, ‘S. 
 and P.’ p. 395), could not have been the Dan 
 here mentioned, as it did not lie in either of 
 the two roads leading from the vale of Siddim 
 to Damascus, Both he and Kalisch think 
 this Dan to be the same as Dan-jaan (2 S. 
 xxiv. 6), apparently belonging to Gilead, and 
 to be sought for in northern Perza, to the 
 south-west of Damascus. The chief objec- 
 tion to this is, that Josephus (as above, ‘ Ant.’ 
 I,r0) and Jerome (‘Qu, Hebr, in Gen,’ ad h.l.) 
 distinctly speak of the Dan here mentioned, as 
 situated at the source of the Jordan, ‘The con- 
 jecture of Le Clerc (Cleric, in Joc.) is not 
 contemptible, viz, that the original name of 
 the fountain was ‘‘ Dan,” i.e. ‘‘judge,” (cp. 
 Ain-mishpat, the fountain of justice), the 
 neighbouring town being called Laish; but 
 that the Danites gave the name of the well, 
 which corresponded with that of their own 
 tribe, to the city as well as the fountain. 
 
 15, he divided himself against them, he 
 
 109 
 
 led forth. 
 ll Or, 
 zustructed, 
 
and smote them, and pursued them 
 unto Hobah, which zs on the left hand 
 of Damascus. 
 
 16 And he brought back all the 
 goods, and also brought again his 
 brother Lot, and his goods, and the 
 women also, and the people. 
 
 and his servants, by night} From v.24 it ap- 
 pears that besides Abram’s own servants 
 there went out with him Aner, Eshcol and 
 Mamre, with their followers, ‘These divided 
 their forces, surprised the invaders at differ- 
 ent points of attack during the darkness, and 
 so routed them, 
 
 Hobah, which is on the left hand of Damas- 
 cus] z.e. to the north of Damascus, the north 
 being to the left of a man, who looks toward 
 the sunrising. A place called Choba is men- 
 tioned, Judith xv, 6; Eusebius (‘Onom,’ v. 
 Xwa) says that in his day a village existed in 
 the neighbourhood of Damascus called by 
 this name, which was inhabited by Ebionites, 
 About two miles from Damascus is now a 
 village called Hobah, said to be the place 
 to which Abram pursued the kings (Stanley, 
 *S. and P.’ p. 414k). 
 
 17. the valley of Shaveh, which is the 
 king’s dale] In 2S, xviii, 18, we read that 
 Absalom in his lifetime ‘took and reared up 
 for himself a pillar, which is in the king’s dale: 
 for he said, I have no son to keep my name in 
 remembrance: and he called the pillar after 
 his own name, and it is called unto this day, 
 Absalom’s place.” Josephus (‘ Ant.’ VII. 10) 
 says, that the monument was two stadia from 
 Jerusalem, This would correspond well with 
 the valley of the Upper Kidron, where are the 
 tombs of the judges and other ancient sepul- 
 chres, a very likely place tor Absalom to have 
 erected what was evidently intended as a 
 sepulchral monument. The tomb now known 
 as Absalom’s is probably not his, as it appears 
 to be of later date, corresponding with the 
 rock-tombs of Petra belonging to a period 
 later than the Christian era (Robinson, ‘ Phys, 
 Geog.’ p. 92). It is not, however, possible to 
 determine the situation of the valley of Shaveh, 
 and its identity with the later King’s Dale of 
 2 S. xviii. 18, without first fixing the site of 
 Salem, of which Melchizedek was king. If 
 Salem be Jerusalem, then Shaveh may well 
 have been the valley of the Kidron, close to 
 Jerusalem: but if Salem were some more 
 northern city, we must leave the position of 
 Shaveh undetermined, See on y, 18. 
 
 18. Melchizedek| Various have been the 
 conjectures in all ages as to the person of Mel- 
 chizedek. Some have supposed the name to 
 be a title, like Augustus or Pharaoh, rather 
 than a proper name, comparing Malek-ol- 
 
 GENESIS. XIV: 
 
 [v. 16—18, 
 
 17 { And the king of Sodom went 
 out to meet him after his return from 
 the slaughter of Chedorlaomer, and 
 of the kings that were with him, at 
 
 re. 
 
 the valley of Shaveh, which zs the c,gamo 
 
 “king’s dale. Ve 
 
 18 And 4 Melchizedek king of Sa-t. 
 
 Adel and Adel-Chan, ze, ‘‘the just king,” a 
 title common to some Mahommedan kings, 
 as the princes of the Deccan and Golconda : 
 but the Hebrew form of the word seems to 
 point to a proper name rather than to a title. 
 Cp. Abi-melech, Gen. xx. 2, Adoni-zedek, 
 Josh, x. 3. The Targums of Jerusalem and 
 Pseudo-Jonathan say, that Melchizedek was 
 Shem, and St Jerome (‘ Qu. ad Genes,’ in loc.) 
 tells us that the Jews of his day said he was 
 Shem the son of Noah, and calculating the 
 days of his life, shewed that he must have 
 lived to the time of Isaac, (See also Epist. 
 LXXIII, ‘ad Evang.’ Opp. I. p. 438). This 
 opinion has been adopted by many moderns, 
 and is defended at length by Jackson ‘On the 
 Creed,’ Bk, 1x. It probably arose from con- 
 siderations of the great dignity of the king 
 and priest, who blessed Abraham and took 
 tithes of him, and from the readiness of the 
 Jews to ascribe such dignity only to an an- 
 cestor of theirown, ‘The Jews very anciently 
 considered him at least to be a type of Mes- 
 siah (Schoettgen, ‘Hor, Hebr.’ T. 11. p. 645); 
 but they generally seem to have believed that 
 he was a prince of the country, asthe Targum 
 of Onkelos and Josephus, which both describe 
 him simply as king of Jerusalem, in which 
 they are followed by most commentators of 
 modern times, It is a question of interest, 
 but impossible to solve, Was he of the Canaan- 
 itish race or Semitic? On ch, x. 6, some 
 explanation is given of the fact that the 
 Canaanites spoke a Semitic tongue. The 
 name and titles of Melchizedek are Semitic, 
 but this proves nothing. He dwelt among 
 Canaanites; but there had probably been 
 Semitic inhabitants of the land before the 
 immigration of the Canaanites (see on ch, xii. 
 6); and so Melchizedek, who was a worship- 
 per of the true God, may have been one of 
 the original Shemite stock. ‘There were, how- 
 ever, worshippers of the true God, besides the 
 Israelites, retaining patriarchal truth, as Job, 
 and Balaam, and so it is not certain that Mel- 
 chizedek was a descendant of Shem. He 
 is, in fact, as the Apostle tells us, introduced 
 ‘without father, without mother, without 
 descent,” with no mention of the beginning 
 of his priesthood or the ending of it, and so 
 specially suited to be a type of the Son of 
 God. He is mentioned once besides in the 
 Old Testament, viz, in Ps, cx, 4, where the 
 priesthood of Messiah is said to be after the 
 
 18, 
 Heb, 7. 
 
vi 19.} - 
 
 Iem brought forth bread and wine: 
 and he was the priest of the most 
 
 high God. 
 
 GENESIS. XIV. 
 
 19 And he blessed him, and said, 
 Blessed be Abram of the most high 
 God, possessor of heaven and earth: 
 
 order of Melchizedek; and again in the New 
 Testament, Heb. v. vi. vii., where the com- 
 parison between the royal priesthood of. Mel- 
 chizedek and that of Jesus is drawn out at 
 length, ‘The special points of resemblance of 
 Melchizedek to Christ are: 1, that he was not 
 of the Levitical order, local, national, but pre- 
 vious to the giving of the Law, catholic, uni- 
 versal; 2. that he was superior to Abraham, 
 blessed and took tithes of him; 3. that (as 
 often in old times, Virg. ‘En,’ 111. 80; Arist. 
 ‘Pol.’ 11. 14, &c.), he was both king and 
 priest; 4. that no beginning and no end are 
 assigned either to his priesthood or his life; 
 5. his name too ‘‘king of righteousness and 
 king of peace,” are eminently suited to a type 
 of the Son of God (Heb. vii. 2, 3). The 
 bringing forth bread and wine is not referred 
 to by the Apostle; but the ancient Church 
 loved to dwell on this as typical of the insti- 
 tution by the Saviour of the 6vcia dvaipaxros, 
 the incruentum sacrificium, as they were wont 
 to call the Holy Eucharist; and later ages 
 may have made more of it than Scripture will 
 warrant, (See Jackson, as above, Bk. Ix, 
 sect. 11. ch, x, 
 
 king of Salem] Josephus (‘ Ant.’ I. Io), 
 Onkelos and all the ‘Targg. understand Jeru- 
 salem, which is called Salem in Ps, lxxvi, 2, 
 and this is pretty certainly the true interpreta- 
 tion. Jerome however (‘Epist, LxxuI. ad 
 Evang.’ Tom. 1. p. 446, edit. Vallars.), says it 
 was not Jerusalem, but a city near Scy- 
 thopolis, called Salem up to his time, where 
 the ruins of Melchizedek’s palace were shewn, 
 and of which it is written (Gen, xxxiil. 18), 
 *« Jacob came to Shalem.” Yet Shalem, in 
 Gen, xxxili, is rendered by Onkelos and a 
 majority of modern commentators, not as a 
 proper name, but rather ‘‘in peace” (see note 
 on ch, xxxili. 19). Moreover, Jerome else- 
 where (‘Qu., in Gen.’) speaks of Melchizedek 
 as ‘*king of Salem, which was the former 
 name of Jerusalem.” Probably Salem was the 
 oldest, Jebus the next, and Jerusalem the 
 more modern name of the same city, though 
 some think that the Salem here was the same 
 as Salim near Anon, where John baptized 
 (Joh. iii. 23). If, as is most probable, Siddim, 
 Sodom and Gomorrah, lay to the south of the 
 Dead Sea, there is no reason why Salem should 
 not have been Jerusalem, or that the valley of 
 Shaveh, which is the ‘‘king’s dale,” should not 
 have been the valley of the Kidron. Ifthe view 
 advocated by Mr Grove (‘ Dict. of Bible,’ 
 art. Shaveh, Siddim, Sodom, Zoar), and de- 
 fended by Dean Stanley (‘S. and P.’ pp. 249, 
 &c.), viz. that the valley of Siddim was north 
 of the Dead Sea, be correct, then no doubt, 
 Salem must have been a place far north of Je- 
 
 rusalem; but the more ancient opinion, viz. 
 that the cities of the plain lay south of the 
 Dead Sea is ably defended by Kuinoel (‘ Ep. ad 
 Hebr,’ vil. 1), Robinson (‘B, R.’ Ir, 188, 
 ‘Phys, Geog.’213), Kurtz, Knobel, Delitzsch, 
 Kalisch, Keil, &c., and is most probably the 
 true. See also note on the Dead Sea at the 
 end of ch, xix, 
 
 the priest} ‘This is the first time that the 
 word priest, Cohen, iepeds, sacerdos, occurs in 
 the Bible, and it is in connection with the 
 worship of an ancient people, perhaps not 
 related by blood to the chosen race, ‘The 
 etymological meaning of the word is unknown, 
 The word itself is applied afterwards both to 
 the Levitical priesthood and to the priesthood 
 of false religions, ‘The patriarchs seem to have 
 had no other priesthood than that of the head 
 of the family (Gen, viii. 20, xil, 8, xxil., XXvi. 
 25, XXXill, 20; Jobi. 5); but here we find 
 Melchizedek designated as a priest and as per- 
 forming many priestly acts, solemnly blessing, 
 taking tithes, &c, ‘There is no distinct men- 
 tion of sacrifice, which was afterwards the 
 most special function of the priesthood, As, 
 however, sacrifice was a rite of common use 
 among the patriarchs, and, later at least, among 
 all surrounding nations, there is no reasonable 
 doubt but that Melchizedek was a sacrificing 
 priest, and so more fitly a type of Christ, who 
 offered Himself a sacrifice without spot to 
 God (see Kuinoel on Heb, vii. 1), Philo indeed 
 asserts that Melchizedek offered the first fruits 
 of the spoil in sacrifice, émwixia ¢bve (‘De 
 Abrah,’ p, 381), a thing by no means impro- 
 bable; and connected with such a sacrifice 
 may have been the bread and wine, corre- 
 sponding with the mo/a and libations of later 
 days. 
 
 tbe most high God| ‘This is the first time 
 we meet with this title, Elion. It occurs 
 frequently afterwards, as Num, xxiv, 16 (where 
 it is used by Balaam, also an alien from the 
 family of Abraham), Deut. xxxii, 18, Ps, vil. 
 16s, Lh) Su RVI. toe Ri Vil 9 KRAUS 4g OCC. 
 where sometimes we have Elion alone, some- 
 times joined with E/, sometimes with JEHO- 
 VAH. It is observed that Sanchoniathon (ap. 
 Euseb, ‘Prep, Evang.’ I. 10) mentions Elion as 
 the name of the Phcenician Deity, So the 
 words alonim walonuth, which occur in the 
 well-known Punic passage in the Poenulus of 
 Plautus, are supposed to correspond with the 
 Hebrew Elionim velionoth, ‘‘ gods and god- 
 desses,” ‘This may be true; the worship of 
 the Phoenicians, as of other heathen nations, 
 was, no doubt, a corruption of the ancient 
 patriarchal faith: but it is plain, that A- 
 bram here acknowledges Melchizedek as a 
 worshipper of the true God: and in v. 22, 
 
 AS 
 
¢ Heb. 7. 
 4. 
 
 t Heb. 
 souls, 
 
 GENESIS. 
 
 20 And blessed be the most high 
 God, which hath delivered thine ene- 
 mies into thy hand, And he gave 
 him ‘tithes of all. 
 
 21 And the king of Sodom said 
 unto Abram, Give me the ‘persons, 
 and take the goods to thyself. 
 
 22 And Abram said to the king of 
 Sodom, I have lift up mine hand unto 
 the Lorp, the most high God, the 
 possessor of heaven and earth, 
 
 23 That I will not take from a 
 thread even to a shoelatchet, and 
 that I will not take anything that zs 
 thine, lest thou shouldest say, I have 
 made Abram rich: 
 
 Abram uses the very titles of God, which 
 had been used by Melchizedek before, coup- 
 ling with them the most sacred name JEHO- 
 VAH, the name of the Covenant God, under 
 which He was ever adored by the chosen seed 
 as specially their God, 
 
 19. possessor of heaven and earth| ‘The 
 LXX, and Vulg. have ‘‘Maker of heaven 
 and earth,” ‘This is probably the true mean- 
 ing, but the word may have either significance 
 (Ges, ‘Th.’ p, 1221, So Delitzsch and Keil). 
 
 20. he gave him tithes of all] ‘The sen- 
 tence, as it stands, is ambiguous, but the 
 sense is obviously (as LXX., Joseph., Jona- 
 than, and Heb, vii. 6) ‘‘ Abram gave Melchi- 
 zedek tithes of all,” z.e. the spolia opima, the 
 tenth part of the spoil which he had taken 
 from the enemy (Joseph, ‘ Ant,’ I. 10), 
 
 21, Give me the persons, and take the goods 
 to thyself.| i.e. restore those of my people, 
 whom you have rescued, but keep what- 
 ever other property of mine you may have 
 lighted on, 
 
 22. I have lift up mine hand unto the 
 Lorpv| A common form of solemn attestation 
 in all nations, (See Dan. xii. 7, Virg. ‘ En,’ 
 XII. 195.) On the identification of the name 
 El-elion with JEHOVAH, and on the use of 
 the latter name, see notes on vv, 1, 18. 
 
 23. That I will not take] Lit. “If I 
 will take.” The particle if was constantly 
 used in swearing, there being an ellipsis of 
 some such expression as ‘‘ God do so to me 
 and more also if,” (1S, iti.17). ‘The particle 
 is literally rendered in Heb, ii, 11, ‘There is 
 a marked difference between Abram’s con- 
 duct to Melchizedek, and his conduct to the 
 king of Sodom. From Melchizedek he re- 
 ceives refreshment and treats him with honour 
 and respect. ‘Towards the king of Sodom he 
 is distant and reserved, Probably the vicious 
 lives of the inhabitants of Sodom made him 
 
 aU aa 
 
 24 Save only that which the young 
 men have eaten, and the portion of — 
 the men which went with me, Aner, 
 Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take 
 their portion. 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 1 God encourageth Abram. 2 Abram com- 
 plaineth for want of an heir. 4 God pro- 
 miseth him a son, and a multiplying of his 
 seed. 6 Abram is justified by faith. 7 Ca- 
 naan ts promised again, and confirmed by a 
 sign, 12 and a vision, 
 
 FTER these things the word of 
 the Lorp came unto Abram in 
 a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I | 
 
 [v. 2o—r, 
 
 am thy shield, and thy exceeding 
 “great reward. or ‘A 
 
 careful not to lay himself under any obliga- 
 tion to their king, lest he should become too 
 much associated with him and them, 
 
 24. the young men|  Abram’s trained 
 servants, whom he had led to the fight (Cp, 
 2S. il. 14, = K, xx. 14). 
 
 CHAP. XV.1. After these things the word 
 of the Lorp came unto Abram in a vision] 
 We have in this chapter a repetition of the 
 promises to Abram, given when he’was first 
 called (ch. xii. 1), and when he first entered 
 into the land of Canaan (ch. xii. 7), with the 
 farther assurance that his own son should be 
 his heir, ‘This is the first time that the ex- 
 pression so frequent afterwards ‘‘ the word of 
 the LorpD” occurs in the Bible. It has been 
 questioned whether the ‘‘ vision” was a dream 
 or waking vision. ‘The same word is used of 
 Balaam, ‘‘ which saw the vision of the Al- 
 mighty, falling, but having his eyes open” 
 (Num. xxiv. 4, 16). The way in which Abram 
 was led out and saw the stars, and the subse- 
 quent reality of the sacrifice, look like a waking 
 vision, and it is not till v. 12, that he falls into 
 a deep sleep. 
 
 Fear not} Abram had now become a 
 great man, with wealth and a comparatively 
 settled home: but he was in a land of stran- 
 gers, and many of them of godless life. He 
 had been engaged in a war, and his very 
 victory might bring reprisals. In his old age 
 he had no children to support and defend 
 him. Accordingly he now is assured of God’s 
 farther protection, and secured against those 
 feelings of despondency natural to one who 
 was lonely, childless, and in danger, It is 
 observed that the words ‘fear not” have in- 
 troduced many announcements of Messiah, as 
 Joh. xii. 19; Luke i, 13, 30, il. 10 (Words~ 
 worth). 
 
 thy exceeding great reward| ‘The word 
 great is here an infinitive absolute used ad- 
 
 16. 
 
yi 2-26.) GENESIS. XV. 
 
 113 
 
 2 And Abram said, Lord Gop, shall come forth out of thine own 
 
 what wilt thou give me, seeing I go bowels shall be thine heir. 
 
 childless, and the steward of my house 5 And he brought him forth a- 
 
 is this Eliezer of Damascus? broad, and said, Look now toward 
 3 And Abram said, Behold, to me heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be 
 
 thou hast given no seed: and, lo,one able to number them: and he said 
 
 born in my house is mine heir. unto him, ?So shall thy seed be. Rome 
 4. And, behold, the word of the 6 And he “believed in the Lorn; Zon. ,, 
 
 LorpD came unto him, saying, ‘This 
 
 and he counted it to him for right- on 
 shall not be thine heir; but he that 
 
 alee Jane 
 ecousness. Jam. 2. 23. 
 
 verbially, so that the more exact rendering 
 may be, ‘Thy reward exceeding abundantly.” 
 The LXX. render ‘‘Thy reward shall be 
 exceeding great,” which is approved by 
 Reediger (in Ges. ‘Thes.’ p. 1257), Rosenm., 
 Delitzsch. 
 
 2. Lord Gop] Adonai JeEnNovAH. This 
 is the first use of these two words together. 
 ‘When separate, both are rendered by versions, 
 ancient and modern, by the same word Lorp. 
 Except in v. 8, the same combination occurs 
 again in the Pentateuch, only in Deut. iil. 24, 
 ix. 26. In all these passages it is in the voca- 
 tive case, and JEHOVAH alone does not occur 
 in Genesis as a vocative (Quarry, ‘Genesis,’ 
 P. 234)- 
 
 seeing I go childless| Abram, though blessed 
 personally, feels that the promises of God seem 
 to extend into the future, and does not un- 
 derstand that they can be fulfilled in him 
 alone. 
 
 the steward of my house is this Eliezer of 
 Damascus| ‘The literal rendering is ‘‘’The son 
 of the business” (or perhaps ‘‘ of the posses- 
 sion”) ‘‘of my house, he is Damascus Eliezer.” 
 It is most probable that ‘‘ Damascus” is put 
 for ‘‘a man of Damascus,” as the Authorized 
 Version. The words rendered ‘“‘steward of 
 my house” are very obscure, so that some 
 ancient versions leave them untranslated. ‘The 
 older critics generally render ‘‘son of the 
 business,” z.e. ‘‘steward;” the majority of 
 modern commentators, after the Syriac, pre- 
 ferring ‘‘ son of possession,” i.e. “heir.” The 
 passage, therefore, must be read either ‘‘ the 
 steward,” or ‘‘ the heir of my house is Eliezer 
 of Damascus.” ‘The tradition of Abram’s 
 connection with Damascus has already been 
 referred to (see Nicol. Damasc. Ap. Joseph. 
 eAnt.. 1. 7; Justin. xxxvi.2).. lf, Abram 
 came into Palestine by the way of Damascus, 
 it is not unlikely that he should have taken 
 his principal retainer from that place. 
 
 3. one born in my house] Lit. “son of 
 my house.” ‘The expression is like, but not 
 necessarily equivalent to that in ch. xvii. 12,27 
 (nia-1"), he that is born in the house, as op= 
 posed to those bought with money of any stran-= 
 
 You, I. 
 
 ger. It is quite possible that the title ‘‘ son 
 of my house,” was applied to inmates of the 
 house, especially those in honourable office in 
 the household, whether born in the family, or 
 afterwards adopted into it. The relation of 
 the head of a family to his retainers was, in 
 the case of Abram at least, truly paternal. 
 It evidently more resembled the connection 
 between a feudal chief and his vassals than 
 that between a master and his slaves. ‘That 
 some of them were ‘bought with money,” 
 appears indeed from the passages above re- 
 ferred to; but they were evidently not in the 
 abject condition which attached to slavery in 
 later days, and the principal among them was 
 marked out in default of his own offspring as 
 heir to his master, though Abram had near 
 relations, and some of them at no greater 
 distance from him than Lot and his family, 
 then living in the plains of Jordan. 
 
 5. tell the stars| In the promise to Noah 
 the rainbow had been the sign given from 
 on high, a sacramental promise of mercy 
 to mankind. Now to Abram the still brighter 
 and more enduring token is the starry firma- 
 ment. His seed should abide as ‘the faithful 
 witness in heaven.” ‘There is the pledge of a 
 brilliant future for his house, even as regards 
 material prosperity; the pledge of still greater 
 blessings to that spiritual family, which by 
 baptism into Christ became ‘‘ Abraham’s seed, 
 and heirs according to the promise” (Gal. iii. 
 
 275 29). 
 
 6.. And he believed in the Lorp; and he 
 counted it to him for righteousness| ‘The root 
 of the word rendered e/ieved has the sense of 
 supporting, sustaining, strengthening. Hence 
 in the Hiphil conjugation (as here), it signi- 
 fies to hold as firm, to rest upon as firm, hence 
 to believe and rely upon as true and stable 
 (Ges. ‘Thes.’ p.114). ‘The promise here made 
 by the Lorp to Abram was given to him 
 before circumcision, whilst there was yet not 
 even the germ of Levitical Law. It contained 
 in it the promise of Christ. It elicited from 
 Abram the great evangelical principle of faith. 
 God promised that which was opposed to all 
 appearance and likelihood. Abram relied on 
 that promise, He surrendered his own wisdom 
 
 H 
 
114 
 
 7 And he said unto him, I am the 
 Lorp that brought thee out of Ur of 
 the Chaldees, to give thee this land 
 to inherit it. 
 
 8 And he said, Lord Gop, where- 
 by shall I know that I shall inherit it? 
 
 g And he said unto him, ‘ake me 
 an heifer of three years old, and a she 
 goat of three years old, and a ram of 
 
 GENES TSS 
 
 adi 
 
 [v. 7—r1. 
 
 three years old, and a turtledove, and 
 a young pigeon. 
 
 10 And he took unto him all these, 
 and divided them in the midst, and 
 laid each piece one against another: 
 but the birds divided he not. 
 
 11 And when the fowls came down 
 upon the carcases, Abram drove them 
 away. 
 
 to the wisdom of God, and so gave up his 
 own will to the will of God. So he became 
 the heir of the promises; and the internal 
 principle of faith became to him the true 
 principle of righteousness. It was the only 
 righteousness possible for the feeble and the 
 sinful; for it was a reposing on the power 
 and the love of the Almighty and the Holy 
 One. It was therefore reckoned to him as 
 what may be called a passive righteousness, 
 and at the same time it was productive in him 
 of an active righteousness: for the soul which 
 relies on the truth, power, and goodness of 
 another, in the strength of that truth, power, 
 and goodness, can itself be active in them all: 
 taking advantage of the power and goodness 
 relied upon, it becomes itself powerful and 
 good and true. ‘The Apostles naturally dwell 
 upon this first recorded instance of faith, faith 
 in God, implied faith in Christ, and consequent 
 accounting of righteousness, recorded before 
 all legal enactments, as illustrative of the great 
 evangelical grace of faith, its power as resting 
 on One who is all powerful, and its sancti- 
 fying energy, as containing in itself the prin- 
 ciple of holiness and the germ of every right- 
 eous act. (Rom. iv. v.; Gal. iii.; Heb. xi; 
 Jas. u.; Soc.) 
 
 7. I am the Lorp that brought thee out 
 of Ur of the Chaldees| In ch. xi. 31, Terah is 
 represented as having left Ur of the Chaldees 
 and settled in Haran with Abram, Sarai and 
 Lot; whilst in ch, xii, 1, Abram is represented 
 as having been called by the Lord to go out of 
 Haran, cp. v. 4. These different statements 
 are thought to be inconsistent with each other 
 and referable to three different hands, Whe- 
 ther there was a distinct command to Abram 
 to leave Ur does not appear. The Lorn by 
 His Providence may have led him and his 
 father out of Ur to Haran, with the design of 
 leading him further onward, and afterwards 
 by special revelation have called him to leave 
 Haran and to go to Canaan (see Quarry, 
 
 Pp. 430). 
 
 8. whereby shall I know] Abram be- 
 lieved God; but there may have been some 
 misgiving as to the reality of what he saw and 
 heard; like St Peter, who “ wist not that it 
 was true which was done by the angel, but 
 
 thought he saw a vision” (Acts xii. 9): and 
 even where there is much faith, a man may 
 distrust himself, may feel that though now 
 the belief is strong, yet ere long the first im- 
 pression and so the firm conviction may fade 
 away. ‘Thus Gideon (Jud. vi, 17), Hezekiah 
 (2 K. xx, 8), the Blessed Virgin (Luk. i. 34) 
 asked a sign in confirmation of their faith, 
 and, as here to Abram, it was graciously 
 given them, 
 
 9. Take me an heifer of three years old| 
 The age chosen was probably because then 
 the animals were in full age and vigour 
 (Chrysost, ‘in Gen, Hom, xxvi.’), The 
 animals were those which specially formed 
 the staple of Abram’s wealth: they were also 
 those, which in after times were specially 
 ordained for sacrificial offerings, It has been 
 said, that the transaction was not a real 
 sacrifice, as there was no sprinkling of blood, 
 nor offering on an altar: but the essence of 
 the true Hebrew sacrifice was in the slaying 
 of the victim, for the very word May (Ze- 
 bach, sacrifice) signifies slaying: and it was 
 rather with the shedding of blood than with 
 its sprinkling that atonement was made (Heb. 
 ix, 22). ‘The covenant was made according 
 to the custom of ancient nations, ‘The sacri- 
 ficed victims were cut into two pieces, and 
 the covenanting parties passed between them 
 (see Jerem, xxxiv, 18, 19). The very word 
 covenant in Hebrew, Berith, is supposed by 
 Gesenius to be from a root signifying to cut 
 (‘ Thes,’ p. 238); and the common formula 
 for ‘to make a covenant” is carath berith, 
 ** to cut a covenant” (so v, 18), comp, the 
 Greek dpxia réuvery (Hom, ‘11.’ v. 124) and 
 the Lat. fedus ferire (see Bochart, ‘ Hieroz,’ 1. 
 332). ‘The division into two is supposed to 
 represent the two parties to the covenant; 
 and their passing between the divided pieces 
 to signify their union into one, ,In this case 
 Abram was there in person to pass between 
 the pieces, and the manifested presence of God 
 passed between them under the semblance of 
 fireavory jc 
 
 10. the birds divided he not] So under 
 the Law the doves offered as burnt offerings 
 were not cleft in two (Lev. i, 17). 
 
 1l, the fowls] The birds of prey. The 
 
v. 12—18. | 
 
 12 And when the sun was going 
 down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; 
 and, lo, an horror of great darkness 
 fell upon him. 
 
 13 And he said unto Abram, Know 
 
 ets7.6. of a surety “that thy seed shall be a 
 
 stranger in a land that zs not theirs, 
 and shall serve them; and they shall 
 
 GENE STS 20V. 
 
 in peace; thou shalt be buried in a 
 good old age. 
 
 16 But in the fourth generation 
 they shall come hither again: for the 
 iniquity of the Amorites zs not yet 
 full. 
 
 17 And it came to pass, that, when 
 the sun went down, and it was dark, 
 
 afflict them four hundred years ; 
 
 behold a smoking furnace, and ‘a burn- t Heb. 
 14 And also that nation, whom 
 
 ing lamp that passed between those a lamp of 
 
 they shall serve, will I judge: and pieces. € chap. 12 
 afterward shall they come out with 18 In the same day the Lorp{%,, ,. 
 
 great substance. made a covenant with Abram, say- & 26. 4. 
 
 eut. 34. 
 
 15 And thou shalt go to thy fathers 
 
 word used (ait) means any rapacious animal, 
 especially vultures or other birds of prey. It 
 is probably of the same root as the Greek 
 deros, eagle, 
 
 Abram drove them away] It is generally 
 thought, that the vultures seeking to devour 
 the sacrifice before the covenant was ratified 
 typified the enemies of Israel, especially the 
 Egyptians; and in a spiritual sense they repre- 
 sent the spiritual enemies, which seek to 
 destroy the soul, keeping it from union with 
 God through the accepted sacrifice of His 
 Son (see Knobel in loc.), 
 
 12. when the sun was going down] The 
 evening came on before all the prepara- 
 tions were made, a solemn time for conclud- 
 ing the covenant between God and the seed 
 of Abram; but it may have been said that it 
 was evening, not night, in order to shew that 
 a great darkness was preternatural (V, Ger- 
 ach), 
 
 a deep sleep| ‘The same word as that used 
 Gen, ii. 21, when Eve was taken from Adam’s 
 side, ‘The constant translation, ékoraaus (eC- 
 stasy), by the LX X. shews the belief that the 
 sleep was sent by God for purposes of Divine 
 revelation, 
 
 an horror of great darkness| Lit. a horror, 
 agreatdarkness, ‘The prophets were fre- 
 quently appalled when admitted to the special 
 presence of God: but here perhaps the horror 
 was connected also with the announcement 
 about to be made to Abram of the sufferings 
 of his posterity. 
 
 13. four hundred years| In Ex, xii. 40 it 
 is called 430. Possibly here the reckoning is 
 in round numbers; also the Hebrews were not 
 ill-treated during the whole 430 years, 
 
 15. And thou shalt go to thy fathers in 
 peace| A similar expression occurs ch, xxv, 
 8, XXxv, 29, xlix. 33. It is interpreted to 
 
 ing, ‘Unto thy seed have I given this 4 
 
 mean either going to the grave, in which his 
 father or his people had been buried, or, (as 
 by Knobel and others) going to that place, 
 where the souls of his ancestors are in the 
 state of separate spirits, ‘That it cannot mean 
 the former here seems to follow from the fact, 
 that Abram was not to be buried in his 
 father’s burying-place, but in a grave which 
 he himself purchased in the land of his adop- 
 tion, 
 
 16. in the fourth generation| On the 
 chronology from the Descent into Egypt 
 to the Exodus, see note on Exod. 
 
 the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full] 
 The Amorites, the most powerful people in 
 Canaan, are here put for the Canaanites in 
 general, ‘Their state of moral corruption Is 
 abundantly manifest in the early chapters of 
 Genesis; and in the Divine foreknowledge 
 it was seen that they would add sin to sin, 
 and so at length be destroyed by the Divine 
 vengeance, Still the long-suffering of God 
 waited for them, giving time for repentance, 
 if they would be converted and live, 
 
 17. when the sun went down, and it was 
 dark| Or, ‘*when the sun had gone down, 
 that there was a thick darkness,” So the Vul- 
 gate. 
 
 a smoking furnace, and a lamp of fire] ‘This 
 was the token of the presence of God, as 
 when He appeared to Moses in the burning 
 bush, and to the Israelites in a pillar of fire. 
 The word /amp may very probably here 
 signify a flame or tongue of fire. The 
 Hebrew word which is cognate with /amp, 
 and the other Aryan words of like sound 
 (Adpro, Aawmrds, &c.) has probably its radical 
 significance a /ambendo, a lambent flame, 
 Compare J/abium, lip, &c. (see Ges. Ths 
 P. 759): 
 
 18. made a covenant] Lit, ‘cut a cove- 
 
 nant,” See above on Vv, 9. 
 H2 
 
116 
 
 GENESTS:: 
 
 land, from the river of Egypt unto the 
 great river, the river Euphrates: _ 
 
 19 The Kenites, and the Keniz- 
 zites, and the Kadmonites, 
 
 20 And the Hittites, and the Pe- 
 rizzites, and the Rephaims, 
 
 21 And the Amorites, and the Ca- 
 naanites, and the Girgashites, and the 
 Jebusites. 
 
 CHAPTER: XVI. 
 1 Sarai, being barren, giveth Hagar to. Abram. 
 4 Hagar, being afflicted for despising her mis- 
 tress, runneth away. 7 Anangel sendeth her 
 
 ay Gree us 
 
 back to submit herself, 11 and telleth her of 
 
 her child. 15 Ishmael ts born. 
 
 OW Sarai Abram’s wife bare 
 
 him no children: and she had 
 an handmaid, an Egyptian, whose 
 name was Hagar. 
 
 2 And Sarai said unto Abram, Be- 
 hold now, the Lorp hath restrained 
 me from bearing: I pray thee, go in 
 unto my maid; it may be that I 
 
 [v. 19—2. 
 
 may ‘obtain children by her, And } Heb, 
 Abram hearkened to the voice of dy hen 
 
 Sarai. 
 
 the river of Egypt| Many understand not 
 the Nile but the Wady-El- Arisch which, how- 
 ever, is called ‘the brook or stream of 
 Egypt” as in Is, xxvii, 12, not ‘the river of 
 Egypt.” ‘The boundaries of the future pos- 
 session are not described with minute accu- 
 racy, but they are marked as reaching from 
 the valley of the Euphrates to the valley of 
 the Nile. And in 2 Chron, ix, 26, it is dis- 
 tinctly stated that ‘‘all the Kings from the river 
 (i.e. Euphrates) even unto the land of the 
 Philistines and to the border of Egypt” were 
 tributary to Solomon, Cp, 2 S, vill. 3. 
 
 19. he Kenites] An ancient people in- 
 habiting rocky and mountainous regicns to 
 the south of Canaan, near the Amalekites 
 (Num. xxiv, 21 seq.; 1 S. xv. 6, XXvil. Io, 
 XXX. 29), a portion of which afterwards mi- 
 grated to Canaan (Judg. i. 16, iv. 11, 17). 
 
 the Kenizzites| Mentioned only here. Bo- 
 chart (‘ Phaleg,’ Iv. 36) conjectures that they 
 had become extinct in the period between 
 Abraham and Moses. 
 
 the Kadmonites] i.e, ‘the Eastern people.” 
 They are not elsewhere named, Bochart 
 thought they might be the Hivites, elsewhere 
 enumerated among the Canaanites, and spoken 
 of as inhabiting the neighbourhood of Mount 
 Hermon (Josh, xiii. 3; Judg. iii. 3), which 
 was to the east of Canaan, 
 
 20. the Hittites, and the Per1zzites, and 
 the Rephaims| See on ch, x. 15, xiii. 7, XIV. 5. 
 
 21. the Amorites, the Girgashites, and 
 the Febusites.}| See on ch, x. 15, 16. 
 
 the Canaanites| here distinguished from 
 the kindred tribes, are described as inhabiting 
 the low country ‘‘from Sodom to Gerar, unto 
 Gaza; as thou goest, unto Sodom, and Go- 
 morrha, and Admah, and Zeboim, even unto 
 Lasha” (Gen, x. 19). 
 
 Cuap. XVI.1. Now Sarai, &c.] The re- 
 capitulatory character of this verse is con= 
 sistent with the general style of the book of 
 
 Genesis, and the connection of the first four 
 verses perfectly natural. ‘The promise of off- 
 spring had been made to Abram, and he be- 
 lieved the promise. It had not, however, 
 been distinctly assured to him that Sarai 
 should be the mother of the promised seed. 
 The expedient devised by Sarai was according 
 to a custom still prevalent in the east. Laws 
 concerning marriage had not been so expressly 
 given to the patriarchs as they afterwards were. 
 Yet the compliance of Abram with Sarai’s 
 suggestion may be considered as a proof of the 
 imperfection of his faith; and it is justly 
 observed, that this departure from the pri- 
 meval principle of monogamy by Abraham 
 has been an example followed by his descend- 
 ents in the line of Ishmael, and has proved, 
 morally and physically, a curse to their race. 
 
 an handmaid, an Egyptian, whose name was 
 Hagar| Hagar, no doubt, followed Sarai from 
 Egypt after the sojourn there recorded in ch. 
 Xii., When it is said that Abraham obtained 
 great possessions, among other things, in ‘*men- 
 servants and maidservants,” v.16. It is gen-= 
 erally thought that the name Hagar signifies 
 Jlight, a name which may have been given her 
 after her flight from her mistress, recorded 
 in this chapter, in which case the name is here 
 given her proleptically, a thing not uncommon 
 in Scripture history. Others suppose that she 
 derived her name from having fled with 
 her mistress out of Egypt. As she was an 
 Egyptian, it is not likely that the Hebrew or 
 Arabic name of Hagar should have been given 
 her by her own parents, 
 
 2. it may be that I may obtain children by her | 
 Lit. ‘“¢I may be built up by her.” ‘The words 
 ‘*house” and ‘‘ family” are in most languages 
 used figuratively the one of the other. The 
 house, considered as representing the family, 
 is built up by the addition of children to it, 
 and so the very word for son, in Hebrew, Ben, 
 is most probably connected with the root 
 banah, ‘to build” (see Ges. ‘Th.’ p. 215). 
 Comp. ch. xxx. 3, where also it appears that 
 the wife, when she gave her handmaid to her 
 
¥. 3—12.| 
 
 And Sarai Abram’s wife took 
 Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after 
 Abram had dwelt ten years in the 
 land of Canaan, and gave her to her 
 husband Abram to be his wife. 
 
 4.9 And he went in unto Hagar, 
 and she conceived: and when she saw 
 that she had conceived, her mistress 
 was despised in her eyes. 
 
 5 And Sarai said unto Abram, My 
 wrong Je upon thee: I have given 
 my maid into thy bosom; and when 
 she saw that she had conceived, I was 
 despised in her eyes: the Lorp judge 
 between me and thee. 
 
 6 But Abram said unto Sarai, Be- 
 hold, thy maid 7s in thy hand; do to 
 
 GENESIS. XVI. 
 
 found her by a fountain of water in 
 the wilderness, by the fountain in the 
 way to Shur. 
 
 8 And he said, Hagar, Sarai’s maid, 
 whence camest thou? and whither 
 wilt thou go? And she said, I flee 
 from the face of my mistress Sarai. 
 
 g And the angel of the Lorn said 
 unto her, Return to thy mistress, and 
 submit thyself under her hands. 
 
 10 And the angel of the Lorp said 
 unto her, I will multiply thy seed 
 exceedingly, that it shall not be num- 
 bered for multitude. 
 
 rr And the angel of the Lorn said 
 unto her, Behold, thou art with child, 
 and shalt bear a son, and shalt call 
 
 117 
 
 |Heb. |, her ‘as it pleaseth thee. And when 
 is godin Sarai tdealt hardly with her, she fled 
 
 thine eyes. 
 
 his name 'Ishmael; because the Lorp t That is, 
 hath heard thy affliction. pie 
 
 tHeb. from her face. 12 And he will be a wild man; his 
 gi 7 4 And the angel of the Lorp hand will be against every man, and 
 
 Sse nn nnn CEES EEE anna 
 
 husband, esteemed the handmaid’s children as 
 her own. 
 
 3. after Abram had dwelt ten years im 
 the land of Canaan] Abram was now 8s and 
 Sarai 75 years old (cp. xii. 4, xvi. 16, XVli. 17). 
 ‘These words are doubtless intended to account 
 for the impatience produced in them by the 
 delay of the Divine promise. 
 
 4. her mistress was despised in her eyes] 
 Among the Hebrews barrenness was esteemed 
 a reproach (see ch, xix. 31, Xxx, I, 23; Lev; 
 xx, 20, &c.): and fecundity a special honour 
 and blessing of God (ch. xxi. 6, xxiv. 60; Ex, 
 xxiii. 26; Deut. vii. 14): and such is still the 
 feeling in the east, But, moreover, very pro- 
 bably Hagar may have thought that now 
 Abram would love and honour her more 
 than her mistress (cp. ch, xxix. 33). 
 
 5. My wrong be upon thee] ie. “my 
 wrong, the injury done to me is due to thee, 
 must be imputed to thee, thou art to be 
 blamed for it, inasmuch as thou sufferest it 
 and dost not punish the aggressor.” So in 
 effect all the versions, LXX., Vulg., Targg., 
 &c, 
 
 7, the angel of the Lorp| Inv. 13 dis- 
 tinctly called the Lorp, See on ch, xii. 7. 
 
 Shur] according to Joseph, (‘ Ant.’ VI. 7) is 
 Pelusium, near the mouth of the Nile, which, 
 however, seems more probably to be the equi- 
 valent for Sin (see Ges. ‘Thes.’ p. 947). On- 
 kelos renders here ‘‘Hagra,” ‘The desert of 
 Shur is generally thought to be the north 
 eastern part of the wilderness of Paran, called 
 at present d/-jifar, Hagar, no doubt, in her 
 
 flight from Sarai, took the route most likely 
 to lead her back to her native land of Egypt; 
 and Gesenius supposes that Shur very proba- 
 bly corresponded with the modern Suez. 
 
 8. Hagar, Sarai’s maid| ‘The words of 
 the angel recal to Hagar’s mind that she was 
 the servant of Sarai, and therefore owed her 
 obedience, 
 
 11. Ishmael; because the Lorp hath heard| 
 i.e. **God heareth, because JEHOVAH hath 
 heard.” ‘The name of God, by which all 
 nations might acknowledge Him, is expressed 
 in the name Ishmael, but the name JEHOVAH, 
 the covenant God of Abraham, is specially 
 mentioned, that she may understand the pro- 
 mise to come to her from Him, who had 
 already assured Abraham of the blessing to 
 be poured upon his race, 
 
 12. a wild man] Lit, *“‘a wild ass of, 
 or among men;” i.e, wild and fierce as a wild 
 ass of the desert, A rendering has been sug- 
 gested, ‘‘a wild ass, a man, whose hand is 
 against every man.” The suggestion is very 
 ingenious; but for such a rendering we should 
 have expected to find the word Ish (vir) not, 
 as it is in the original, Adam (homo). ‘The 
 word pere, wild ass, is probably from the 
 root para, signifying ‘to run swiftly.” This 
 animal is frequently mentioned in Scripture, 
 and often as a type of lawless, restless, un- 
 bridled dispositions in human beings (see Job 
 xi. 12, xxiv. 5; Ps. civ. rr; Is, xxxu, 14; 
 Jer. ii. 24; Dan. v. 21; Hos, viii. 9). In 
 Job xxxix, 5, another Hebrew word is used, 
 but most commentators consider that the same 
 animal is meant, ‘The description of their 
 
118 GENESIS. XVI. XVII. [v. 13-1. 
 
 @ chap. 25. every man’s hand against him; @and 16 And Abram was fourscore and 
 ‘ he shall dwell in the presence of all six years old, when Hagar bare Ish- 
 his brethren. mael to Abram. 
 13 And she called the name of the CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 Lorp that spake unto her, Thou 1 Gog reneweth the covenant. 5 Abram his 
 God seest me: for she said, Have name is changed in token of a greater bless 
 
 : ing. 10 Circumcision is instituted. 15% Sarai 
 I also here looked after him that her name is changed, and she blessed. 17 
 seeth me? Lsaac is promised. 23 Abraham and Ishmael 
 
 14 Wherefore the well was called — ave circumcised. 
 7 chap. 24. 5 Beer-lahai-roi ; behold, t is between As when Abram was ninety 
 
 Ze . 
 \ That is, Kadesh and Bered. years old and nine, the Lorp 
 the well of 
 
 him that 15 {1 And Hagar bare Abram ason: appeared to Abram, and said unto e chagi 
 eee att and Abram called his son’s name, him, I am the Almighty God; @walk t6r, ‘ 
 which Hagar bare, Ishmael. before me, and be thou ' perfect. sie 
 
 great speed in Xen. ‘ Anab,’ Lib, 1. is well 
 known. Gesenius refers to a picture of the 
 wild ass of Persia in Ker Porter’s ‘Travels 
 in Georgia and Persia,’ Vol. 1. p. 459, and 
 says, that a living specimen which he saw 
 in the London Zoological Gardens in 1835 
 exactly corresponded with this picture (‘Thes,’ 
 Daii23): 
 
 bis hana will be against every man, &c.] 
 or ‘“‘upon every man,” a common phrase for 
 violence and injury (cp, Gen, xxxvii, 27; Exod, 
 ix, 3; Deut. ii. 16; Josh. ii, 19; 1 S. xviii. 17, 21, 
 Xxiv. 13,14). The violent character and law- 
 less life of the Bedouin descendants of Ishmael 
 trom the first till this day is exactly described 
 in these words, 
 
 in the presence of all his brethren] Lit. “in 
 front” or ‘‘before the face of all his brethren,” 
 This may point to that constant attitude of 
 the Bedouin Arabs, living every where in 
 close proximity to their kindred races, hover- 
 ing round them, but never mingling with 
 them: or, we may render ‘to the east of all 
 his brethren,” atranslation adopted by Rosenm., 
 Gesen., Tuch, Knobel, Delitzsch, &c. ‘The 
 Arabs are called in Job i. 3, ‘the children of 
 the east,” and in some passages of Scripture 
 the phrase ‘in the presence of,” is explained 
 to mean ‘eastward of” (see Numb. xxi, 11; 
 Josh, xv. 8; Zech. xiv. 4); the rationale of 
 this being, that when a man looked toward 
 the sunrise, the east was defore him. 
 
 13. Thou God seest me: for she said, Have 
 I also here looked after him that seeth me? | 
 Thou art a God of seeing, for have 
 I also seen here after seeing? ‘The 
 Authorized Version has nearly followed the 
 rendering of the LXX, and Vulg., which is 
 inadmissible, ‘The meaning of the words is pro- 
 bably, ‘Thou art a God that seest all things,” 
 (or perhaps ‘“‘that revealest Thyself in vi- 
 sions”); ‘¢and am I yet living and seeing, after 
 seeing God?” (cp. Judg. xiii, 21). So ap- 
 parently Onkelos ; and this rendering is adopt- 
 ed by Rosenm,, Gesen., Tuch, Kalisch, De- 
 
 litzsch, and most moderns, The name of God 
 throughout this chapter is JEHOVAH, except 
 when Hagar the Egyptian speaks; yet the God 
 of vision who reveals Himself to her is carefully 
 identified with the JEHovAn of Abraham, 
 
 14. Beer-labai-roi| ‘The well of life 
 of vision,” z.e, where life remained after vision 
 of God, (See Ges, ‘Thes.’ p, 175.) This 
 seems to be the meaning of the name accord- 
 ing to the etymology derived from the last 
 verse, though others render it ‘“‘the well of 
 the living One (i.e, the living God) of vision,” 
 
 between Kadesh and Bered] On the site of 
 Kadesh and its uncertainty see on ch, xiv, 7, 
 The uncertainty of the site of Bered is still 
 greater, and therefore the difficulty of arriving 
 at the exact position of Beer-lahai-roi is al- 
 most insuperable, Mr Rowlands (in Williams’ 
 ‘Holy City,’ 1. 465) thinks that he has dis- 
 covered its site at a place called Moilahhi, 
 about ro hours south of Ruheibeh, in the 
 road from Beersheba to Shur, or Jebel-es-sur, 
 a mountain range running north and south in 
 the longitude of Suez, 
 
 CHAP. XVII.1. And when Abram was 
 ninety years old and nine] i.e. just thirteen years 
 after the events related in the last chapter, 
 compare v. 25, where Ishmael is said to be 
 now thirteen years old. 
 
 the Almighty God] El-Shaddai. ‘The word 
 Shaddai, translated by most versions ‘‘ mighty,” 
 or ‘‘Almighty,”is generally thought (by Gesen., 
 Rosenm., Lee, &c. &c.) to be a plural of ex- 
 cellence (in this respect like Elohim), derived 
 from the root Shadad, the primary meaning 
 of which appears to have been ‘to be strong,” 
 ‘to act strongly,” though more commonly 
 used in the sense of ‘‘to destroy, to devastate.” 
 The later Greek versions Aq., Sym., Theod., 
 render ixavds, ‘‘sufficient,” ‘¢all-sufficient.” 
 So Theodoret, Hesych., Saad. Accordingly, 
 Rashi and some of the Jewish writers con- 
 sider it to be compounded of two words, sig= 
 nifying ‘‘ who is sufficient?” the improbability 
 
Teb. 
 
 ultitude 
 ‘nations. 
 
 Rom. 4. 
 
 v. 2—12.] 
 
 2 And I will make my covenant 
 between me and thee, and will mul- 
 tiply thee exceedingly. 
 
 3 And Abram fell on his face: and 
 God talked with him, saying, 
 
 4 As for me, behold, my covenant 
 is with thee, and thou shalt be a 
 father of ‘many nations. 
 
 5 Neither shall thy name any more 
 be called Abram, but thy name shall 
 be Abraham; ?for a father of many 
 nations have I made thee. 
 
 6 And I will make thee exceeding 
 fruitful, and I will make nations of 
 thee, and kings shall come out of thee. 
 
 7 And I will establish my cove- 
 nant between me and thee and thy 
 seed after thee in their generations 
 for an everlasting covenant, to be a 
 God unto thee, and to thy seed after 
 thee. 
 
 8 And I will give unto thee, and to 
 
 SPAVE Sie ase 
 
 10 fe) 
 
 thy seed after thee, the land ‘wherein t Heb. 
 thou art a stranger, all the land of %i% $0 
 Canaan, for an everlasting possession ; - 
 and I will be their God. 
 
 g 4 And God said unto Abraham, 
 Thou shalt keep my covenant there- 
 fore, thou, and thy seed after thee in 
 their generations. 
 
 10 This zs my covenant, which ye 
 shall keep, between me and you and 
 thy seed after thee; “Every man child ¢ Acts 7.8. 
 among you shall be circumcised. 
 
 11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh 
 of your foreskin; and it shall be a 
 @token of the covenant betwixt me @ Acts;.8. 
 and you. Rom. 4.11. 
 
 12 And he that is ‘eight days old t Heb. 
 ‘shall be circumcised among you, every Bohs oon 
 man child in your generations, he that fmaeie: 
 is born in the house, or bought with yoha pt 
 money of any stranger, which zs not a 
 
 of thy seed. 
 
 of which derivation is very great. The title, 
 or character, El-Shaddai, is said, Exod. vi. 2, 3, 
 to have been that by which God was revealed 
 to the patriarchs, not then, at least in its full 
 meaning, by the name JEHOVAH; and it is 
 noted as occurring in those passages which 
 the German critics call Elohistic. In this 
 very verse, however, we read it in immediate 
 juxtaposition with the name JEHOVAH, and 
 in Ruth i. 20, 21, we find the identification of 
 JEHOVAH with Shaddai. Probably, like Elo- 
 him, and Adonai, we may consider E]-Shad- 
 dai (a title known to Balaam, Num. xxiv. 4, 
 16, and constantly used in Job), to have been 
 
 one of the more general world-wide titles of. 
 
 the Most High, whilst JEnovaAu was rather 
 the name by which His own chosen people 
 knew and acknowledged Him. ‘The title, 
 which especially points to power, seems most 
 appropriate when a promise is made, which 
 seems even to Abram and Sarai to be well- 
 nigh impossible of fulfilment. 
 
 2. I will make my covenant| The word 
 for ‘‘make” is different from that used in 
 xv. 18. ‘There God is said to have ‘‘cut” a 
 covenant with Abram by sacrifice, which 
 phrase has probably special reference to the 
 sacrifice and also to the two parties who made 
 the covenant by sacrifice (see on xv.9). Here 
 He says, ‘‘I will give my covenant between 
 Me and thee.” ‘The freedom of the covenant 
 of promise is expressed in this latter phrase. 
 It was a gift from a superior, rather than a 
 bargain between equals; and as it was ac- 
 companied by the rite of circumcision, it was 
 typical of the freedom of that covenant made 
 
 afterwards to Christians in Christ, and sealed 
 to them in the sacred rite of baptism. 
 
 4. of many nations! Of a multitude 
 of nations; as in margin. 
 
 5. Abraham] ie. ‘father of a multi- 
 tude.” He was originally b-ram, ‘“ exalted 
 father.” Now he becomes 4b-raham, ‘‘ father 
 of a multitude;” raham, in Arabic, being a 
 vast number, a great multitude. Abraham 
 was literally the ancestor of the twelve tribes 
 of Israel, of the Ishmaelites, of the descend- 
 ants of Keturah and of the Edomites; but 
 spiritually he is the father of all the faithful, 
 who by faith in Christ are ‘‘ Abraham’s seed, 
 and heirs according to the promise” (Gal. iil. 
 29). It has been very generally believed that 
 the letter H here introduced into the names 
 both of Abraham and Sarah is one of the two 
 radical letters of the name JEHOVAH (as the 
 other radical ¥ was introduced into the name 
 Joshua), whereby the owner of the name is 
 doubly consecrated and bound in covenant to 
 the Lorp (see Delitzsch, in loc.). ‘The cus- 
 tom of giving the name at the time of cir- 
 cumcision (Luke i. 59) probably originated 
 from the change of Abraham’s name having 
 been made when that rite was first instituted. 
 
 10. This is my covenant] i, the sign, 
 token and bond of the covenant. 
 
 12. eight days old| Seven days, a sacred 
 number, were to pass over the child before he 
 was so consecrated to God’s service. ‘There 
 was a significance in the number 7, and there 
 was a reason for the delay that the child 
 might grow strong enough to bear the oper- 
 ation. 
 
120 
 
 ‘13 He that is born in thy house, 
 and he that is bought with thy money, 
 must needs be circumcised: and my 
 covenant shall be in your flesh for an 
 everlasting covenant. 
 
 14 And the uncircumcised man 
 child whose flesh of his foreskin is not 
 circumcised, that soul shall be cut off 
 from his people; he hath broken my 
 covenant. 
 
 15 ™ And God said unto Abraham, 
 As for Sarai thy wife, thou shalt not 
 call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall 
 her name Ze, 
 
 13. He that is born in thy house, &c.] 
 ‘¢ Moses has nowhere given any command, 
 nor even so much as an exhortation, inculcat- 
 ing the duty of circumcision upon any person 
 not a descendant, or a slave of Abraham, or 
 of his descendants, unless he wished to par- 
 take of the passover.... In none of the his- 
 torical books of the Old Testament do we 
 find the smallest trace of circumcision as ne- 
 cessary to the salvation of foreigners, who ac- 
 knowledge the true God, or requisite even to 
 the confession of their faith: no not so much 
 as in the detailed story of Naaman (2 K. v.); 
 in which indeed every circumstance indicates 
 that the circumcision of that illustrious per- 
 sonage can never be supposed” (Michaelis, 
 ‘Laws of Moses,’ Bk. Iv. Art. 184). ‘There 
 is a marked distinction in this between cir- 
 cumcision and baptism. Judaism was in- 
 tended to be the religion of a peculiar isolated 
 people. Itsrites therefore were for them alone. 
 Christianity is for the whole human race; the 
 Church is to be catholic; baptism to be ad- 
 ministered to all that will believe. 
 
 14. that soul shall be cut off from his 
 people] ‘The rabbinical writers very generally 
 understand that the excision should be by 
 Divine judgment. Christian interpreters have 
 mostly understood the infliction of death by 
 the hand of the magistrate: some (Cleric. and 
 Michael, in loc.) either exile or excommuni- 
 cation. The latter opinion was afterwards 
 retracted by Michaelis, and it is pretty certain 
 that death in some form is intended (see Gesen. 
 ‘Thes.’ p. 718). 
 
 15. thou shalt not call her name Sarai, 
 but Sarah shall her name be| ‘There is but 
 little doubt that Sarah signifies ‘+ Princess,” in 
 allusion probably to the princely race which 
 was to spring from her, though Ikenius, fol- 
 lowed by Rosenmiiller, argues in favour of a 
 meaning to be derived from the Arabic root 
 Saraa, signifying, ‘‘to have a numerous pro- 
 geny.” As to the original name Sarai, the 
 older interpreters generally understood it to 
 
 GENESIS/ 2611 
 
 [v. 13—18. 
 16 And I will bless her, and give 
 
 thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless 
 
 her, and 'she shall be a mother of na-t Heb. 
 tions; kings of people shall be of 57,427 
 
 nations. 
 
 her. 
 
 17 Then Abraham fell upon his 
 face, and laughed, and said in his 
 heart, Shall a child be born unto him 
 that is an hundred years old? and 
 shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, 
 bear? 
 
 18 And Abraham said unto God, 
 O that Ishmael might live before 
 thee! 
 
 signify ‘*my princess:” the change to Sarah 
 indicating that she was no longer the princess 
 of a single race, but rather that all the families 
 of the earth should have an interest in her (Je- 
 rome, ‘ Qu. Hebr.’ p. 522); many think that 
 Sarai means simply ‘noble, royal,” whilst Sa- 
 rah more definitely means ‘ princess;” which, 
 however, seems neither etymologically nor 
 exegetically probable. Ewald explains Sarai 
 as meaning ‘‘contentious,” from the verb 
 Sarah, 17, which (Gen. xxxii. 29; Hos. xii. 
 4) occurs in the sense of ‘‘to fight, to con- 
 tend.” ‘This meaning is approved by Gese- 
 nius (‘Thes.’ p. 1338), but the more usual 
 derivation is probably the true. 
 
 16. she shall be a mother of nations} Heb. 
 ** she shall become nations.” 
 
 17. Jaughed| Onkel. renders ‘‘rejoiced.” 
 Pseudo-Jon. ‘‘ marvelled.” The Jewish com- 
 mentators, and many of the Christian fathers, 
 understood this laughter to be the laughter of 
 joy not of unbelief (Aug. ‘ De Civ.’ xvI. 26). 
 So also many moderns, e.g. Calvin, ‘ partly 
 exulting with gladness, partly carried beyond 
 himself with wonder, he burst into laughter.” 
 It is thought also that our Blessed Lord may 
 have alluded to this joy of Abraham (Joh. viii. 
 56), ‘* Your father Abraham rejoiced to see 
 My day, and he saw it and was glad;” for it 
 was at the most distinct promise of a son, who 
 was to be the direct ancestor of the Messiah, 
 that the laughter is recorded (cp, also the 
 words of the Blessed Virgin, Luke i. 47). On 
 the other hand it must be admitted, that A- 
 braham’s words immediately following the 
 laughter, seem at first sight as implying some 
 unbelief, or at least weakness of faith, though 
 they may be interpreted as the language of 
 wonder rather than of incredulity. 
 
 18. O that Ishmael might live before thee!) 
 These words may be interpreted in two 
 ways, according as we understand the laugh- 
 ter of Abraham. ‘They may mean, ‘‘I dare 
 not hope for so great a boon as a son to be 
 born hereafter to myself and Sarah in our old 
 
‘nap. 18. 
 
 aI. 
 
 : 
 
 chap. 25. 
 
 2. 
 
 2. 
 
 vy. 19—27.| 
 
 19 And God said, / Sarah thy wife 
 shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou 
 shalt call his name Isaac: and I will 
 establish my covenant with him for 
 an everlasting covenant, and with his 
 seed after him. 
 
 20 Andas for Ishmael, I have heard 
 thee: Behold, I have blessed him, 
 and will make him fruitful, and will 
 multiply him exceedingly; twelve 
 princes shall he beget, and I will 
 ‘make him a great nation. 
 
 21 But my covenant will I establish 
 with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto 
 thee at this set time in the next year. 
 22. And he left off talking with him, 
 and God went up from Abraham. 
 
 23 { And Abraham took Ishmael 
 
 age, but O that Ishmael may be the heir of 
 Thy promises!” or they may imply only a 
 fear, that now, when another heir is assured 
 to Abraham, Ishmael should be excluded from 
 all future inheritance. 
 
 19. Isaac] i.e. ‘+he laughs,” the third per- 
 son singular of the present tense: similar forms 
 are Jacob, Jair, Jabin, &c, 
 
 GENES Tsp xy LG 
 
 his son, and all that were born in his 
 house, and all that were bought with 
 his money, every male among the men 
 of Abraham’s house; and circumcised 
 the flesh of their foreskin in the self- 
 same day, as God had said unto him. 
 
 24 And Abraham was ninety years 
 old and nine, when he was circum- 
 cised in the flesh of his foreskin. 
 
 25 And Ishmael his son was thir- 
 teen years old, when he was circum- 
 cised in the flesh of his foreskin. 
 
 26 In the selfsame day was Abra- 
 ham circumcised, and Ishmael his son. 
 
 27 And all the men of his house, 
 born in the house, and bought with 
 money of the stranger, were circum- 
 cised with him. 
 
 20. as for Ishmael, I have heard thee] 
 There is an allusion to the significance of the 
 name Ishmael, viz. ‘‘ God heareth.” 
 
 25. Ishmael his son was thirteen years old] 
 The Arabs have in consequence always cir= 
 cumcised their sons at the age of 13. Josephus 
 mentions this (‘ Ant.’ 1. 13), and it is well 
 known that the custom still prevails among 
 the Mahometan nations. 
 
 NOTE A on CHAP. XVII. V. 10. 
 
 (2) Origin of circumcision, whether pre-Abrahamic or not. 
 
 Reasons for the rite. 
 
 @) 
 
 (a) Egyptians said to have first used it. 
 
 CIRCUMCISION. 
 
 (8) Answer from lateness and uncertainty 
 
 of the testimony. (y) Balance of arguments. 
 
 THE reasons for this rite may have been 
 various, 1st, to keep the descendants of Abra- 
 ham distinct from the idolatrous nations 
 round about them, the other inhabitants of 
 Palestine not being circumcised, 2ndly, to 
 indicate the rigour and severity of the Law of 
 God, simply considered as Law, in contrast to 
 which the ordinance that succeeded to it in 
 the Christian dispensation indicated the mild- 
 ness and mercy of the new covenant, ardly, 
 to signify that the body should be devoted as 
 a living sacrifice to God, ‘‘ our hearts and all 
 our members being mortified from all carnaland 
 worldly lusts,” and so to typify moral purity, 
 (See Deut. x. 16; Jer. iv. 4; Acts vil. 51). 
 An important question arises as to the ori- 
 gin of circumcision, Was it first made known 
 and commanded to Abraham, having nowhere 
 been practised before? Or, was it a custom 
 already in use, and now sanctified by God to 
 a higher end and purport? A similar question 
 arose concerning sacrifice. Was it prescribed 
 by revelation or dictated by natural piety and 
 then sanctioned from above? As the rainbow 
 probably did not first appear after the flood, 
 
 but was then made the token of the Noachic 
 coyenant; as the stars of heaven were made 
 the sign of the earlier covenant with Abraham 
 (ch, xv. 5) 3 may it have been also, that cir- 
 cumcision already prevailed among some na~ 
 tions, and was now divinely authorized and 
 made sacred and authoritative? There would 
 be nothing necessarily startling in the latter 
 alternative, when we remember that the cor- 
 responding rite of baptism in the Christian dis- 
 pensation is but one adaptation by supreme au- 
 thority of natural or legal washings to a Chris= 
 tian purpose and a most spiritual significance. 
 
 It is certain that the Egyptians used_cir- 
 cumcision (Herod. 1. 36, 37; 1043 Diod, 
 Sicul. I. 26, 55; Strabo, XVII. p. 5243 Phil. 
 Jud. ‘De Circumcis,’11. p, 210 5 Joseph, ‘ Ant.’ 
 Vill. 10; ‘Cont. Apion.’ I. 22; 1. 13). ‘The 
 earliest writer who mentions this is Herodo- 
 tus, He says, indeed, that the Egyptians and 
 Ethiopians had it from the most remote antl- 
 quity, so that he cannot tell which had it 
 first ; he mentions the Colchians as also using 
 it (whence Diodorus inferred that they were 
 an Egyptian colony), and says that the Phe- 
 
P22 
 
 nicians and Syrians in Palestine admit that 
 they ‘‘learned this practice from the Egyp- 
 tians” (Herod, 11. 104). ‘This is evidently a 
 very loose statement. ‘The Phoenicians pro- 
 bably did not use it, and the Jews, whom He- 
 rodotus here calls ‘‘ the Syrians in Palestine,” 
 admitted that they had once dwelt in Egypt, 
 but never admitted that they derived circum- 
 cision from thence, The statements of Dio- 
 dorus and Strabo, which are more or less 
 similar to those of Herodotus, were no doubt 
 partly derived from him, and partly followed 
 the general belief among the Greeks, that the 
 ‘¢ Jews were originally Egyptians” (Strabo, as 
 above), It is stated by Origen (‘in Epist, ad 
 Rom,’ ch, 11. 13) that the Egyptian priests, 
 soothsayers, prophets, and those learned in 
 hieroglyphics were circumcised; and the same 
 is said by Horapollo (1. 13, 14). If these 
 ancient writers were unsupported by other 
 authorities, there would be no great difficulty 
 in concluding that Herodotus had found cir- 
 cumcision among the Egyptian priests, had 
 believed the Jews to be a mere colony from 
 Egypt, and had concluded that the custom 
 originated in Egypt, and from them was learned 
 by the Ishmaelites and other races, It is, how= 
 ever, asserted by some modern Egyptologists, 
 that circumcision must have prevailed from 
 the time of the fourth dynasty, ze. from at 
 least 2400 B.C., therefore much before the date 
 generally assigned to Abraham, B.C. 1996, and 
 that it was not confined to the priests, as is, 
 they say, learned from the mummies and the 
 sculptures, where circumcision is made a dis- 
 tinctive mark between the Egyptians and their 
 enemies (see Sir Gardiner Wilkinson, in Raw- 
 linson’s ‘ Herodotus,’ pp. 52, 146, 147, notes). 
 If this be correct, we must conclude, that the 
 Egyptians practised circumcision when Abra- 
 ham first became acquainted with them, that 
 probably some of Abraham’s own Egyptian 
 followers were circumcised, and that the Di- 
 vine command was not intended to teach a 
 new rite, but to consecrate an old one into a 
 sacramental ordinance. Some even think that 
 they see in the very style of this and the follow- 
 ing verses indications that the rite was not al- 
 together new and before unknown; for had it 
 been new and unknown, more accurate di- 
 rections would have been given of the way in 
 which a painful and dangerousoperation should 
 be performed (Michaelis, ‘Laws of Moses,’ 
 Bk, Iv. Ch, iii, Art. 185). The Egyptians, 
 Ethiopians, and perhaps some other African 
 races, are supposed to have adopted it, partly 
 from regard to cleanliness (Herod, II. 36), 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 1 Abraham entertaineth three angels. 9 Sarah 
 1s reproved for laughing at the strange pro- 
 mise. 17 The destruction of Sodom is revealed 
 to Abraham, 23 Abraham maketh intercession 
 Jor the men thereof. 
 
 GINS IS a7ca oee 
 
 [vs ¥, 2, 
 
 which the Egyptians, and above all the Egyp- 
 tian priests, especially affected, partly to guard 
 against disease incident in those hot climates 
 (see Philo, as above, p.211; Joseph. ‘C. Apion.’ 
 II. 13), partly for other reasons, which may 
 have been real or imaginary (see Michaelis, as 
 above, Art. 186). ‘This side of the question 
 is ably defended by Michaelis, ‘ Laws of Moses,’ 
 as above, and Kalisch, in loc. 
 
 In answer it is truly said, that the Greek 
 historians are too late and too loose in their 
 statements to command our confidence ; that 
 the tribes cognate with the Egyptians, such as 
 the Hamite inhabitants of Palestine, were no 
 toriously uncircumcised, that the Egyptians, 
 especially the Egyptian priests, are not un- 
 likely to have adopted the rite at the time 
 when Joseph was their governor and in such 
 high estimation among them, and that the 
 question concerning the relative dates of Abra= 
 ham and the different Egyptian dynasties is 
 involved in too much obscurity to be made a 
 ground for such an argument as the above to 
 be built upon it. (See Bp. Patrick, in loc.; 
 Heidegger, ‘ Hist. Patr.’ 11. 240; Wesseling 
 and Larcher, ‘ad Herod.’ 11. 37, 104; Graves 
 ‘onthe Pentateuch,’ Pt. 11. Lect. v.; Words- 
 worth, in loc.) Again, the argument de- 
 rived from the ancient Egyptian language 
 proves nothing, the words are lost or doubt- 
 ful. ‘The argument from the mummies proves 
 nothing, as we have no mummies of the an- 
 cient empire. ‘The figures in the hieroglyphics 
 are later still. The only argument of weight 
 is that derived from the old hieroglyphic, 
 common in the pyramids, which is thought 
 to represent circumcision. It may on the 
 whole be said, that we cannot conclude from 
 the loose statements of Greek writers 15 
 centuries later than Abraham, nor even from 
 the evidence of monuments and sculptures 
 as yet perhaps but imperfectly read and un- 
 certain as to their comparative antiquity, 
 that circumcision had been known before 
 it was given to Abraham; yet that on the 
 other hand, there would be nothing incon- 
 sistent with the testimony of the Mosaic 
 history in the belief, that it had been in use 
 among the Egyptians and other African tribes, 
 before it was elevated by a Divine ordinance 
 into a sacred rite for temporary purposes, to 
 be served in the Mosaic dispensation. A very 
 able summary of the arguments on both sides, 
 not, of course, embracing those drawn from 
 the more recent discoveries in Egypt, is given 
 by Spencer, ‘De Legg. Heb.’ lib. I. c. 5. § 4. 
 See Deut. x. 16 and Note. ) 
 
 ND the *Lorp appeared unto ¢ Heb. 13 
 
 him in the plains of Mamre: * 
 and he sat in the tent door in the 
 heat of the day ; 
 
 2 And he lift up his eyes and 
 
Gris DOES Tees Mi UTE, 
 
 looked, and, lo, three men stood by 
 him: and when he saw them, he ran 
 to meet them from the tent door, and 
 bowed himself toward the ground, 
 
 3 And said, My Lord, if now I have 
 
 found favour in thy sight, pass not 
 
 Vv. 3—7:] 123 
 
 and ‘comfort ye your hearts; after Heb. 
 
 that ye shall pass on: for therefore 
 
 fare ye come to your servant. And wee 
 
 they said, So do, as thou hast said. assed. 
 6 And Abraham hastened into the 
 
 tent unto Sarah, and said, ' Make ready poe 
 
 away, I pray thee, from thy servant: 
 
 4 Let a little water, I pray you, be 
 fetched, and wash your feet, and rest 
 yourselves under the tree: 
 
 5 And I will fetch a morsel of bread, 
 
 CuHAP. XVIII.1. plains of Mamre] Oaks 
 or oak grove of Mamre, sce xill. 18; 
 ZiT. 33. 
 
 in the heat of the day| Abraham was sitting 
 in his tent under the shade of the trees, at the 
 noon day when the sun was oppressive, and 
 when the duty of hospitality specially sug- 
 gested to him the receiving of travellers, who 
 might be wearied with their hot journey. The 
 time of the day may be also mentioned, that 
 it might be the more certain that this was an 
 open vision, not a dream of the night. 
 
 2. three men] Inv. 1 it is said, ‘The 
 Lorp appeared unto him;” in v. 22 it is said, 
 ‘The men turned their faces from thence, and 
 went towards Sodom; but Abraham stood 
 yet before the Lorp;” in ch. xix. 1 it is said, 
 ‘There came favo Angels to Sodom at even.” 
 It appears from the comparison of these pas- 
 sages, and indeed from the whole narrative, 
 that of the three men who appeared to Abra- 
 ham, two were angels, and one was JEHO- 
 VAH Himself. On the belief of the ancient 
 Church that these manifestations of God were 
 manifestations of God the Son, anticipations 
 of the Incarnation, see note on ch. xl. 7. See 
 also on this passage, Euseb. ‘ Demonst. Evan.’ 
 Lib. v. c. 9. ‘There was, however, a belief 
 among many of the ancients that the three 
 men here appearing to Abraham symbolized 
 the three Persons of the Trinity; and the 
 Church by appointing this chapter to be read 
 on ‘Trinity Sunday seems to indorse this 
 belief. ‘This need not conflict with the 
 opinion, that the only Person in the Trinity 
 really manifested to the eyes of Abraham was 
 the Son of God, and that the other two were 
 created angels. Indeed such a manifestation 
 may have been reason enough for the choice 
 of this lesson on ‘Trinity Sunday. It has been 
 observed that One of the three mentioned in 
 this chapter is called repeatedly JEHOVAH, but 
 neither of the two in ch. xix. is ever so called. 
 
 bowed himself toward the ground | This was 
 merely the profound eastern salutation (cp. 
 ch, xxiii. 7, 12, Xxxili. 6, 7). Abraham as yet 
 was ‘‘entertaining angels unawares” (Heb. xiii. 
 2). He may have observed a special dignity 
 
 quickly three measures of fine meal, 
 knead it, and make cakes upon the 
 hearth. 
 
 7 And Abraham ran unto the herd, 
 and fetcht a calf tender and good, and 
 
 in the strangers, but could not have known 
 their heavenly mission. 
 
 8. My Lord] It isto be noticed that Abra- 
 ham here addresses One of the three, who 
 appears more noble than the rest. ‘The title 
 which he gives Him is Adonai, a plural of excel- 
 lence, but the Targum of Onkelos has rendered 
 JEHOVAH (*), as supposing that Abraham 
 had recognized the divinity of the visitor. 
 
 4. wash your feet] In the hot plains of 
 the east travellers shod only with sandals 
 found the greatest comfort in bathing their 
 feet, when resting from a journey. (See ch. 
 XIX. 2, XXIV. 323 Judg. xix.21; 1 Tim.v, ro.) 
 
 5. comfort ye your hearts| Lit. “sup-= 
 port your hearts.” ‘The heart, considered as 
 the centre of vital functions, is put by the 
 Hebrews for the life itself. ‘To support the 
 heart therefore is to refresh the whole vital 
 powers and spirits. (See Ges. ‘Thes.’ p. 738, 
 6, 225, I. a.) 
 
 for therefore are ye come to your servant] 
 The patriarch recognizes a providential call 
 upon him to refresh strangers of noble bears 
 ing, come to him on a fatiguing journey. 
 
 6. three measures of fine meal| Three 
 seahs of the finest flour. A seab was 
 the third part of an ephah according to the 
 Rabbins. Josephus (‘ Ant,’ Ix, 4) and Jerome 
 (‘Comm. on Matt.’ xiii, 33), say that the 
 seah was a modius and a half. ‘The accuracy 
 of this comparison between the Hebrew and 
 Roman measures is doubted, as it does not cor= 
 respond with the calculations of Rabbinical 
 writers, (See Ges, ‘’Thes.’ pp. 83, 932; Smith, 
 ‘ Dict. of Bible,’ Vol. 111. pp. 1741,1742.) The 
 two words, Kemach soleth, rendered ‘“ fine 
 meal,” are nearly synonymous, both appearing 
 to mean fine flour, the latter being the finer 
 of the two. ‘They might be rendered ‘‘ flour 
 of fine flour.” According to the Rabbinical 
 Commentary, ‘ Vajikra Rabba,’ so/eth is the 
 kemach of kemachs, the fine flour of fine flour, 
 (See Ges, ‘’'Thes,’ p. 959.) 
 
 cakes upon the hearth| Probably the sim- 
 pler form of cake baked in the midst of hot 
 cinders, 
 
gave zt unto a young man; and he 
 hasted to dress it. 
 
 8 And he took butter, and milk, and 
 the calf which he had dressed, and set 
 it before them; and he stood by them 
 under the tree, and they did eat. 
 
 9 4 And they said unto him, Where 
 is Sarah thy wife? And he said, Be- 
 hold, in the tent. 
 
 10 And he said, I will certainly 
 return unto thee according to the time 
 
 é chap. 17. Of life; and, lo, ?Sarah thy wife shall 
 &o1.2, have a son. And Sarah heard 7¢ in 
 
 the tent door, which was behind 
 him. 
 
 11 Now Abraham and Sarah were 
 old and well stricken in age; and it 
 
 8. butter] ie. thick milk or clotted 
 cream. ‘The modern Arabs have a simple 
 mode of churning, and make very good but- 
 ter, Robinson (‘Res,’ I, p. 180) describes 
 the baking of cakes and making of butter 
 among them in the present day. It is, how- 
 ever, most probable, that the word, rendered 
 butter in the Old ‘Testament, was rather thick 
 milk, or more probably, thick cream, though 
 in one place (Prov, xxx. 33), it may perhaps 
 be rendered cheese, The ancient inhabitants of 
 Palestine used olive oil where we use butter, 
 (See Rosenm. and Ges, ‘ Thes,’ p. 486.) 
 
 they did eat] ‘That spiritual visitants, though 
 in human form, should eat, has been a puzzle 
 to many commentators, Josephus (‘ Ant,’ I, 
 1x) and Philo (‘Opp.’ 11. 18), say it was in 
 appearance only, which is implied by Pseudo- 
 Jonathan, Rashi and Kimchi, If the angels 
 had assumed human bodies, though but for a 
 time, there would have been nothing strange 
 in their eating. In any case, the food may 
 have been consumed, miraculously or not; 
 and the eating of it was a proof that the visit 
 of the angels to Abraham was no mere vision, 
 but a true manifestation of heavenly beings. 
 
 10. se said) In v. 9 we read ‘they 
 said,” z.e, one of the three heavenly guests 
 spoke for the others. Now we have the 
 singular number, and the speaker uses lan- 
 guage suited only to the Ruler of nature and 
 of all things, 
 
 according to the time of life] ‘There is some 
 difficulty in the rendering of these words. 
 The phrase occurs again, 2 K.iv.16. It is 
 now generally thought that the sense is the 
 same as in ch, xvii. 21, ‘‘at this set time in 
 the next year” (cp. xvili. 14); and that the 
 words should be translated, ‘‘ when the season 
 revives,” ze. when spring or summer comes 
 round again, Compare 
 
 GEN ES Toney als 
 
 fv. 8—1s. 
 
 ceased to be with Sarah after the 
 manner of women. 
 
 12 ‘Therefore Sarah laughed within 
 herself, saying, After I am waxed old 
 shall I have 
 old also? 
 
 13 And the Lorp said unto Abra- 
 ham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, 
 saying, Shall I of a surety bear a 
 child, which am old? 
 
 14 Is any thing too hard for the 
 Lorp? At the time appointed I will 
 return unto thee, according to the 
 time of life, and Sarah shall haveason. 
 
 15 Then Sarah denied, saying, I 
 laughed not; for she was afraid. And 
 he said, Nay; but thou didst laugh. 
 
 xaipe, yuvat, pidrornte’ mepitAopevou & 
 €VLAVTOU 
 TéEeis dyAaa Tekva. 
 Hom, ‘Od.’ A. 247. 
 
 (See Rosenm. in loc; Ges, ‘’Thes.’ p. 470.) 
 Prof. Lee (‘Lex.’ p. 193). denies the sound- 
 ness of this criticism, and virtually indorses 
 the Authorized Version, ‘‘as (at) the season, 
 period, of a vigorous woman.” ‘There is, 
 however, very little doubt that the criticism 
 is correct. 
 
 12. laughed] Whatever may have been 
 the nature of Abraham’s laughter (see xvii, 
 17), this of Sarah’s seems to have resulted 
 from incredulity. She may scarcely have 
 recognized the Divinity of the speaker, and 
 had not perhaps realized the truth of the 
 promise before made to Abraham, St Au- 
 gustine distinguishes between the laughter of 
 Abraham and that of Sarah thus, ‘‘The 
 father laughed, when a son was promised to 
 him, from wonder and joy;. the mother 
 laughed, when the three men renewed the 
 promise, from doubtfulness and joy. The 
 angel reproved her, because though that laugh- 
 ter was from joy, yet it was not of full faith. 
 Afterwards by the same angel she was con- 
 firmed in faith also.” ‘De C, D.’ Xvi. 31, 
 
 my lord] See x Pet. iii. 6. 
 
 13. the Lorp said] Here the speaker 
 is distinctly called JEHOVAH, and it seems 
 much more reasonable to believe that there 
 was a Theophania of the Son of God, than 
 that a created angel was personating God and 
 speaking in His name, 
 
 14. Is any thing too hard for the Lorp?| 
 Lit. ‘“‘Is anything too wonderful for the 
 Lord?” Cp, Luke i. 37. 
 
 At the time appointed I will return unto thee, 
 according to the time of life] See on v. Io, 
 
 “jor ing ©: Pet. 
 pleasure, my ‘lord being éx Pet. 3 
 
y. 16—28.] 
 
 16 4 And the men rose up from 
 thence, and looked toward Sodom: 
 and Abraham went with them to 
 bring them on the way. 
 
 17 And the Lorn said, Shall I 
 hide from Abraham that thing which 
 Ido; 
 
 18 Seeing that Abraham shall surely 
 become a great and mighty nation, 
 and all the nations of the earth shall 
 
 chap. 2. be “blessed in him? 
 3, & 22, 18. 
 Acts 3. 25+ 
 sal. 3. 8. 
 
 19 For I know him, that he will 
 command his children and his house- 
 hold after him, and they shall keep 
 the way of the Lorn, to do justice 
 and judgment; that the Lorp may 
 bring upon Abraham that which he 
 hath spoken of him. 
 
 20 And the Lorp said, Because the 
 ery of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, 
 and because their sin is very grievous ; 
 
 21 I will go down now, and see 
 whether they have done altogether 
 according to the cry of it, which is 
 come unto me; and if not, I will 
 know. 
 
 22, And the men turned their faces 
 
 GENES Dognanve Liles I 
 
 from thence, and went toward Sodom: 
 but Abraham stood yet before the 
 Lorp. 
 
 23 § And Abraham drew near, 
 and said, Wilt thou also destroy the 
 righteous with the wicked? 
 
 2.4 Peradventure there be fifty right- 
 eous within the city: wilt thou also 
 destroy and not spare the place for 
 the fifty righteous that are therein? 
 
 «25 That be far from thee to do after 
 this manner, to slay the righteous with 
 the wicked: and that the righteous 
 should be as the wicked, that be far 
 from thee: Shall not the Judge of all 
 the earth do right? 
 
 26 And the Lorp said, If I find in 
 Sodom fifty righteous within the city, 
 then I will spare all the place for their 
 sakes. 
 
 27 And Abraham answered and 
 said, Behold now, I have taken upon 
 me to speak unto the Lord, which am 
 but dust and ashes: 
 
 28 Peradventure there shall lack 
 five of the fifty righteous: wilt thou 
 destroy all the city for Jack of five? 
 
 ne eer enc crccc cc crr cc rrr are reer carrera caer errr cc ccc see IEE TEnEEIEIIEEE Sn ERE enn EERnn anna 
 
 16. Abraham went with them] The three 
 heavenly visitors all go towards Sodom, A- 
 braham goes some way with them, how far 
 is not said, There is a tradition that he went 
 as far as Caphar-berucha, from which the 
 Dead Sea is visible, through a ravine. 
 
 17. Shall I hide from Abraham] ‘The 
 LXX. adds here ‘‘ my son,” which is quoted 
 by Philo (1. p. 401, Mangey) as ‘‘ Abraham, 
 my friend:” so that in all probability, copies 
 of the LXX. in the time of Philo had this 
 afterwards familiar name of Abraham ex- 
 pressed in this verse. Cp. 2 Chr.xx. 7; Isa. 
 xli. 8; James il. 23. 
 
 19. For I know him, that] This is the 
 general reading of the ancient Versions, LX X., 
 Vulg., Targg., kc. &c. It does not, how- 
 ever, seem to correspond with the Hebrew 
 idiom. ‘The literal rendering would be, ‘I 
 have known him, to the end that, in order 
 that, he should command his children, &c.” 
 The word (YI, to know) is sometimes used 
 of the eternal foreknowledge and election of 
 God, as in Amos iii. 2, ‘‘ You only have I 
 known of all the families of the earth.” Cp. 
 Exod. xxxiii. 12; Job xxii. 13; Ps. Ixxiil. 11, 
 cxliv. 3; Is. lviii. 3; Nah.i. 7. And compare 
 a similar use in the Greek Testament, Rom. 
 
 viii. 29, xi. 2. ‘The meaning would then be; 
 ‘‘] have foreknown and chosen Abraham, 
 that he should be the depositary of my truth, 
 and should teach his children in the way of 
 religion and godliness, that so the promises 
 made to him should be fulfilled in his seed 
 and lineage. So Ges. (‘’Thes.’ p.571), Rosenm., 
 Tuch, Knobel, Delitzsch, Keil, &c. 
 
 20. the cry] Cp.ch. iv. 10; Ps. ix. 13. 
 
 Q1. I will go down] Ch. xi. 5,7; Ex. 
 iii. 8. ‘The reason for God’s thus revealing 
 His purpose to Abraham seems to have been, 
 that, as Abraham was to be the heir of the 
 promises, he might be taught and might teach 
 his children, who were afterwards to dwell in 
 that very country, that God is nota God of 
 mercy only, as shewn to Abraham and his 
 descendants, but a God of judgment also, as 
 witnessed by His destruction of the guilty 
 cities of the plain. 
 
 2.2. the men turned their faces from thence, 
 &c.] ‘The two created angels went on to So- 
 dom (see ch. xix. 1), ‘but Abraham stood 
 yet before the Lorp,” stood yet in the pre- 
 sence of that third Being who was not a 
 created angel, but the eternal Word of God, 
 “the Angel of Mighty counsel” (Isai. ix. 6, 
 LXX.); ‘the Messenger of the covenant” 
 (Mal. iii. 1). 
 
 U1 
 
And he said, If I find there forty and 
 five, I will not destroy 7t. 
 
 29 And hespake unto him yet again, 
 and said, Peradventure there shall be 
 forty found there. And he said, I 
 will not do zt for forty’s sake. 
 
 30 And he said unto him, Oh let not 
 the Lord be angry, and I will speak: 
 Peradventure there shall thirty be 
 found there. And he said, I will not 
 do zt, if I find thirty there. 
 
 31 And he said, Behold now, I have 
 taken upon me to speak unto the 
 Lord: Peradventure there shall be 
 twenty found there. And he said, I 
 will not destroy zt for twenty’s sake. 
 
 32 And he said, Oh let not the Lord 
 be angry, and I will speak yet but this 
 once: Peradventure ten shall be found 
 there. And he said, I will not de- 
 stroy zt for ten’s sake. 
 
 33 And the Lorp went his way, as 
 soon as he had left communing with 
 Abraham: and Abraham returned 
 unto his place. 
 
 32. I will not destroy it for ten’s sake] 
 A noted example of the efficacy of prayer, of 
 the blessedness of a good leaven in a city or 
 nation, and of the longsuffering mercy of God. 
 
 CHAP. XIX. 1. two angels] Lit. the 
 two angels. So LXX. Thetwomen, who 
 left Abraham still standing in the presence of 
 the Lorp (ch. xviii.22) now came to Sodom 
 at even. 
 
 Lot sat in the gate of Sodom] ‘The gate of 
 the city was, in the ancient towns of the 
 east, the common place of public resort, both 
 for social intercourse and public business. 
 This gate of the city nearly corresponded with 
 the forum or market-place of Greece and 
 Rome. Not only was it the place of public 
 sale, but judges and even kings held courts of 
 justice there. ‘The gate itself was probably an 
 arch with deep recesses, in which were placed 
 the seats of the judges, and benches on either 
 side were arranged for public convenience. 
 (Cp. ch. xxxiv. 20; Deut. xxi. 19, xxii. 15; 
 Ruth iv. 1. See also Hom. ‘Il.’ Lib. 111. 
 148.) 
 
 bowed himself | See on ch. xviii. 2. 
 
 2. my lords| ‘The Masorites mark this word 
 as ‘* profane,” z,¢, as not taken in the divine, 
 but in the human sense. Lot, like Abraham, 
 only saw in the angels two men, travellers 
 apparently wearied with the way, and he offers 
 
 GENESIS, 26 PER x1, 
 
 [v. 29—3. 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 1 Lot entertaineth two angels. 
 Sodomites are stricken with blindness. 12 Lot 
 zs sent for safety into the mountains. 18 He 
 obtaineth leave to 90 into Zoar. 24 Sodom and 
 Gomorrah are destroyed. 26 Lot’s wife is a 
 pillar of salt. 30 Lot dwelleth in a cave. 3% 
 The incestuous original of Moab and Ammon, 
 
 yas there came two angels to 
 Sodom at even; and Lot sat in 
 the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing 
 them rose up to meet them; and he 
 bowed himself with his face toward 
 the ground; 
 
 2 And he said, Behold now, my 
 lords, turn in, I pray you, into your 
 servant’s house, and tarry all night, 
 
 4 The vicious 
 
 and “wash your feet, and ye shall rise chap. 18, 
 
 up early, and go on your ways. And * 
 they said, Nay; but we will abide in 
 the street all night. 
 
 3 And he pressed upon them greatly ; 
 and they turned in unto him, and 
 entered into his house; and he made 
 them a feast, and did bake unleavened 
 bread, and they did eat. 
 
 them all the rites of hospitality. In those days 
 there were neither inns nor perhaps even 
 caravanserais, so that private houses only could 
 give lodging to strangers. 
 
 we will abide in the street all night] ‘The 
 ‘¢ street,” lit. ‘“‘the broad, open space,” pro- 
 bably included all the streets, squares, and 
 inclosures, frequently extensive in an eastern 
 city, and in these early days perhaps less 
 built over than in modern towns. ‘The warmth 
 of the climate would make it easy to pass the 
 night insucha place. The words of the angels 
 may be compared with our Lord’s manner as 
 recorded Luke xxiv. 28, ‘‘ He made as though 
 He would have gone further.” ‘The visit of 
 the angels was one of trial previous to judg- 
 ment (see ch. xvill. 21), trial of Lot as well as 
 of the people of Sodom. Lot’s character, 
 though he is called ‘‘a righteous” or upright 
 ‘‘man” (2 Pet. ii. 7), was full of faults and 
 infirmities, but here he comes out well under 
 the trial. His conduct is altogether favour- 
 ably contrasted with that of the inhabitants 
 of the city, and so he is delivered, whilst they 
 are destroyed. 
 
 83. a feast] Lit. “Sa drink, or banquet, 
 symposium.” It is the word used commonly 
 for a sumptuous repast. 
 
 unleavened bread] As having no time to 
 leaven it. Literally the words mean ‘bread 
 of sweetness,” i.e. bread which had not been 
 made bitter by leaven. 
 
Vv. 4—13.] 
 
 4 4 But before they lay down, the 
 men of the city, even the men of 
 Sodom, compassed the house round, 
 both old and young, all the people 
 from every quarter: 
 
 5 And they called unto Lot, and 
 said unto him, Where are the men 
 which came in to thee this night? 
 bring them out unto us, that we may 
 know them. 
 
 6 And Lot went out at the door 
 unto them, and shut the door after 
 him, 
 
 7 And said, I pray you, brethren, 
 do not so wickedly. 
 
 8 Behold now, I have two daughters 
 which have not known man; let me, 
 I pray you, bring them out unto you, 
 and do ye to them as 7s good in your 
 eyes: only unto these men do nothing ; 
 for therefore came they under the 
 shadow of my roof. 
 
 4. all the people from every quarter| ‘The 
 utter shamelessness of the inhabitants of 
 Sodom, as well as their unbridled licentious- 
 ness, is briefly but most emphatically expressed 
 in this verse. ‘The Canaanitish nations in 
 general, and the cities of the plain especially, 
 were addicted to those deadly sins so strictly 
 forbidden to the Israelites. See Lev. xx. 
 2%, 236 
 
 6. Lot went out at the door unto them, 
 and shut the door after him] Lit. ‘went out 
 at the doorway, and shut the door after 
 him.” 
 
 8. I have two daughters] ‘These words 
 of Lot have been much canvassed in all times. 
 St Chrysostom thought it virtuous in him not 
 to spare his own daughters, rather than sacri- 
 fice the duties of hospitality, and expose his 
 guests to the wickedness of the men of Sodom 
 (‘Hom. xxit. in Gen.’). So St Ambrose (‘ De 
 Abrah.’ Lib. I. c. 6), speaking as if a smaller 
 sin were to be preferred to a greater. But St 
 Augustine justly observes, that we should 
 open the way for sin to reign far and wide, if 
 we allowed ourselves to commit smaller sins, 
 lest others should commit greater (‘ Lib. contr. 
 Mend.’ c. 9. See also ‘ Qu. in Gen.’ 42). We 
 see in all this conduct of Lot the same mixed 
 character. He intended to do rightly, but 
 did it timidly and imperfectly. He felt strongly 
 the duty of hospitality, perhaps by this time 
 he had even some suspicion of the sacred cha- 
 racter of his guests, but his standard of right, 
 though high when compared with that of his 
 neighbours, was not the highest. ‘The sacred 
 
 GENESIS. XIX. 
 
 127 
 
 g And they said, Stand back. And 
 they said again, This one fellow came 
 in to sojourn, and he will needs be a 
 judge: now will we deal worse with 
 thee, than with them. And they 
 pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, 
 and came near to break the door. 
 
 10 But the men put forth their 
 hand, and pulled Lot into the house 
 to them, and shut to the door. 
 
 11 And they smote the men éthat — 19. 
 
 were at the door of the house with ~ 
 blindness, both small and great: so 
 that they wearied themselves to find 
 the door. 
 
 12 4 And the men said unto Lot, 
 Hast thou here any besides? son in 
 law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, 
 and whatsoever thou hast in the city, 
 bring them out of this place: 
 
 13 For we will destroy this place, 
 because the ‘cry of them is waxen ,,. 
 
 writer relates the history simply and without 
 comment, not holding up Lot as an example 
 for imitation, but telling his faults as well as 
 his virtues, and leaving us to draw the infer- 
 ences. He brought all his troubles on himself 
 by the home he had chosen. He was bound 
 to defend his guests at the risk of his own 
 life, but not by the sacrifice of his daughters. 
 
 9. Stand back| Lit. ‘Come near, farther 
 off.” 
 
 will needs be a judge] or, ‘judging, he will 
 judge,” referring, probably, as Tuch observes, 
 to Lot’s frequent remonstrances with them for 
 their licentiousness and violence, which is re- 
 ferred to in 2 Pet.1i. 7, 8. 
 
 1l. they smote the men that were at the 
 door of the house with blindness| Perhaps the 
 word for blindness rather indicates confused 
 vision, LX X. dopacia. In Wisd. xix.17, the 
 darkness in which these men were involved is 
 compared with the plague of ‘darkness which 
 may be felt,” which fell on the Egyptians 
 (Ex.x.22). If it had been actual blindness, 
 they would hardly have wearied themselves to 
 find the door, but would have sought some 
 one to lead them by the hand (August. ‘ De 
 Civit. Dei’ xx1I. 19). ‘The same word, the 
 root of which is very doubtful (see Gesen. 
 ‘Thes.’ p. 961), occurs only once again, 1m 
 2 K. vi. 18, where, apparently (see vv. 19,20), 
 not real blindness, but indistinctness of vision 
 and misleading error are described. » Aben 
 Ezra interprets it as meaning ‘“‘ blindness of 
 eye and mind.” 
 
 ¢ chap. 18. 
 
128 
 
 +t Heb. 
 
 are found. 
 
 l Or, 
 punish- 
 
 ment, 
 
 2 Wisd. 10, 
 6. 
 
 great before the face of the Lorn; 
 and the Lorp hath sent us to de- 
 stroy it. 
 
 14 And Lot went out, and spake 
 unto his sons in law, which married 
 his daughters, and said, Up, get you 
 out of this place; for the Lorn will 
 destroy this city. But he seemed as 
 one that mocked unto his sons in 
 law. 
 
 15 4 And when the morning arose, 
 then the angels hastened Lot, saying, 
 Arise, take thy wife, and thy two 
 daughters, which tare here; lest thou 
 be consumed in the "iniquity of the 
 city. 
 
 16 And ¢while he lingered, the 
 men laid hold upon his hand, and 
 upon the hand of his wife, and upon 
 the hand of his two daughters; the 
 Lorp being merciful unto him: and 
 they brought him forth, and set him 
 without the city. 
 
 17 4 And it came to pass, when 
 
 13. the Lorp hath sent us to destroy it] 
 The angels speak here as messengers of judg= 
 ment, not as He, who conversed with Abra- 
 ham, ch, xviii. 17—33. 
 
 14. which married his daughters] Lit. 
 ‘‘the takers of his daughters.” LXX. ‘¢*who 
 had taken his daughters.” Vulg. ‘‘ who were 
 about to marry his daughters.” Some, Kno- 
 bel, Delitzsch, &c., have held that besides 
 those mentioned, vv. 8, 30, Lot had other 
 daughters, who had married men of the city, 
 and who perished in the conflagration with 
 their husbands. It is more commonly thought 
 that he had only two daughters, who were 
 betrothed, but not yet married; betrothal 
 being sufficient to give the title “son in law” 
 or “bridegroom” to their affianced husbands. 
 
 15. which are here] Lit. “which are 
 found.” ‘This seems to Knobel and others to 
 indicate that there were other daughters, but 
 that these two only were at home, the others 
 being with their husbands in the city (see on 
 v.14); but it very probably points only to 
 the fact, that Lot’s wife and daughters were 
 at home and ready to accompany him, whilst 
 his sons in law scoffed and refused to go. 
 
 16. the Lorp being merciful unto him] 
 Lit. ‘‘in the mercy” (the sparing pity) ‘of 
 the Lorp to him.” 
 
 17. that he said] i.e. one of the angels. 
 
 the plain} ‘The kikkar, the circuit of the 
 Jordan. Lot was to escape from the whole 
 
 GE NES Tick eX 
 
 |v. 14—22, 
 
 they had brought them forth abroad, 
 that he said, Escape for thy life; look 
 not behind thee, neither stay thou in 
 all the plain; escape to the mountain, 
 lest thou be consumed. 
 
 18 And Lot said unto them, Oh, 
 not so, my Lord: 
 
 19 Behold now, thy servant hath 
 found grace in thy sight, and thou 
 hast magnified thy mercy, which thou 
 hast shewed unto me in saving my 
 life; and I cannot escape to the moun- 
 tain, lest some evil take me, and [ 
 die: 
 
 20 Behold now, this city zs near to 
 flee unto, and it zs a little one: Oh, 
 let me escape thither, (zs it not a little 
 one!) and my soul shall live. 
 
 21 And he said unto him, See, I 
 
 have accepted ‘thee concerning this t Heb. 
 
 thing also, that I will not overthrow 
 this city, for the which thou hast 
 spoken. 
 
 22 Haste thee, escape thither; for 
 
 of the devoted region, which he had formerly 
 coveted for his own, and where, when he 
 parted from Abraham, he had made his habi- 
 tation, and sought to enrich himself. 
 
 18. my Lord] ‘The Masorites have the 
 note kadesh, i.e. ‘‘ holy,” but it is probably no 
 more than the salutation of reverence, see 
 v. 2. For, though Lot had now found out 
 the dignity of his guests, there is no evidence 
 that he thought either of them to be the Most 
 High. Indeed the word might be rendered 
 in the plural ‘‘my lords,” as the Syr. and 
 Saad. 
 
 19. I cannot escape to the mountain] Lot 
 and his family were, no doubt, exhausted by 
 fear and anxiety, and he felt that, if he had to 
 go to the mountains of Moab, he would be 
 exposed to many dangers, which might prove 
 his destruction; another instance of defective 
 courage and faith, which yet is pardoned by a 
 merciful God. 
 
 some evil] The evil, ze. the destruction 
 about to fall on Sodom; all Lot’s conduct 
 here denotes excessive weakness. 
 
 20. is it not a little one?| ‘Though Zoar 
 may have been involved in the guilt of the 
 other cities of the plain, Lot pleads that it has 
 but few inhabitants, and that the sins of such 
 a small city can be but comparatively small. 
 So Rashi. 
 
 21. I have accepted thee] Lit. ‘I have 
 lifted up thy face.” It was the custom in the 
 
 thy face. 
 
| 
 ) 
 ‘eb. 
 
 vi 23—28,| 
 
 I cannot do anything till thou be 
 come thither. [herefore the name 
 of the city was called Zoar. 
 
 23 {1 The sun was ‘risen upon the 
 
 ‘eforth. earth when Lot entered into Zoar. 
 
 Jeut. 29. 
 
 24 Then ‘the Lorp rained upon 
 
 ke17, Sodom and upon Gomorrah brim- 
 
 ui. 13. 19. 
 
 stone and fire from the Lorp out of 
 
 r. 50. 40. heaven ; 
 
 nos 4. II. 
 
 de 7. 
 
 25 And he overthrew those cities, 
 
 GENESES ix EX, 
 
 and all the plain, and all the inhabitants 
 of the cities, and that which grew upon 
 the ground. 
 
 26 { But his wife looked back from 
 behind him, and she became a pillar of 
 salt. 
 
 27 4 And Abraham gat up early in 
 the morning to the place where he 
 stood before the Lorn: 
 
 28 And he looked toward Sodom 
 
 Sa ee 
 
 East to make supplication with the face to 
 the ground; when the prayer was granted, 
 
 the face was said to be raised. 
 
 22. Zoar| i.e. “little.” It appears by 
 several ancient testimonies to have been be- 
 lieved that Zoar or Bela, though spared from 
 the first destruction of the cities of the plain, 
 was afterwards swallowed up by an earth- 
 quake, probably when Lot had left it, v. 30. 
 (See Jerom. ‘ad Jos.’ xv. and ‘Qu. in Gen.’ 
 ¢. XIV.; Theodoret ‘in Gen.’ xIx.). This 
 tradition may account for the statement in 
 Wisdom x. 6, that five cities were destroy- 
 ed, and of Josephus (‘B. J.’ Iv. 8. 4), that 
 the ‘‘shadowy forms of five cities” could be 
 seen; whereas Deut. xxix. 23 only mentions 
 four, viz. Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and 
 Zeboim: yet, on the other hand, Eusebius 
 (v. Bada) witnesses that Bela, or Zoar, was 
 inhabited in his day, and garrisoned by Ro- 
 man soldiers. 
 
 24. the Lorp rained upon Sodom and upon 
 Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lorp out 
 of heaven| ‘The Lorp is said to have rained 
 from the Lorb, an expression much noted by 
 commentators, Jewish and Christian. Several 
 of the Rabbins, Manasseh Ben Israel, R. Si- 
 meon, and others, by the first JEHOVAH under- 
 stand the angel Gabriel, the angel of the 
 Lorp: but there is certainly no other passage 
 in Scripture, where this most sacred name 
 is given to a created angel. Many of the 
 fathers, Ignatius, Justin M., Tertullian, Cy- 
 prian, Athanasius, Hilary, The Council of 
 Sirmium, &c. see in these words the mystery 
 of the Holy Trinity, as though it were said, 
 ‘© Gop the Word rained down fire from GoD 
 the Father;” an interpretation which may 
 seem to be supported by the Jerusalem Tar- 
 gum, where ‘‘the Word of the LorpD” is 
 said to have ‘trained down fire and bitumen 
 from the presence of the Lorn.” Other pa- 
 tristic commentators of the highest authority 
 (as Chrysostom, Jerome and Augustine) do 
 not press this argument. Aben Ezra, whom 
 perhaps a majority of Christian commentators 
 have followed in this, sees in these words a 
 peculiar ‘‘elegance or grace of language,” 
 ‘‘’ The Lorp rained...from the Lorp” being a 
 grander and more impressive mode of saying, 
 
 VoL. I, 
 
 ‘‘The Lorp rained from Himself.” It is a 
 common idiom in Hebrew to repeat the noun 
 instead of using a pronoun. 
 
 brimstone and fire...out of heaven] Many 
 explanations have been offered of this. Whe- 
 ther the fire from heaven was lightning, which 
 kindled the bitumen and set the whole country 
 in a blaze, whether it was a great volcanic 
 eruption overwhelming all the cities of the 
 plain, or whether there was simply a miracu- 
 lous raining down of ignited sulphur, has 
 been variously disputed and discussed. From 
 comparing these words with Deut. xxix. 23, 
 where it is said, ‘¢‘ The whole land thereof is 
 brimstone and salt and burning,” it may be 
 reasonably questioned, whether the ‘‘ brim- 
 stone” in both passages may not mean Jditu-= 
 men, with which unquestionably, both before 
 (see ch. xiv. ro), and after the overthrow, the 
 whole country abounded (see also Jerusalem 
 Targum quoted in the last note). The Al- 
 mighty, in His most signal judgments and. 
 even in His most miraculous interventions, 
 has been pleased often to use natural agencies; 
 as, for instance, He brought the locusts on 
 Egypt with an East wind and drove them 
 back with a West wind (Ex. x. 13, 19). 
 Possibly therefore the bitumen, which was the 
 natural produce of the country, volcanic or 
 otherwise, was made the instrument by which 
 the offending cities were destroyed. ‘The re- 
 velation to Abraham, the visit of the angels, 
 the deliverance of Lot, mark the whole as 
 miraculous and the result of direct interven- 
 tion from above, whatever may have been the 
 instrument which the Most High made use of 
 to work His pleasure. 
 
 26. a pillar of salt] All testimony speaks 
 of the exceeding saltness of the Dead Sea, 
 and the great abundance of salt in its neigh- 
 bourhood (e.g. Galen. ‘De Simp. Medic. 
 Facult. rv. 19). In what manner Lot's wife 
 actually perished has been questioned. Aben- 
 Ezra supposed that she was first killed by the 
 brimstone and fire and then incrusted over 
 with salt, so as to become a statue or pillar of 
 salt. ‘There was a pillar of salt near the Dead 
 Sea, which later tradition identified with Lot’s 
 wife (Joseph. ‘ Ant.’ I. 11; ren. IV. 57; Ter- 
 tullian, ‘Carmen de Sodoma;’ Benjamin of 
 
 I 
 
 129 
 
130 
 
 and Gomorrah, and toward all the 
 land of the plain, and beheld, and, lo, 
 the smoke of the country went up as 
 the smoke of a furnace. 
 
 _ 29 4 And it came to pass, when 
 God destroyed the cities of the plain, 
 that God remembered Abraham, and 
 sent Lot out of the midst of the over- 
 throw, when he overthrew the cities 
 in the which Lot dwelt. 
 
 30 @ And Lot went up out of 
 Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and 
 his two daughters with him; for he 
 feared to dwell in Zoar: and he dwelt 
 
 in a cave, he and his two daughters. 
 
 31 And the firstborn said unto the 
 younger, Our father zs old, and there 
 
 “zs not a man in the earth to come in 
 unto us after the manner of all the 
 earth: 
 
 32 Come, let us make our father 
 drink wine, and we will lie with him, 
 
 Tudela, ‘Itin.’ p.44. See Heidegger, Il. p. 269). 
 The American expedition, under Lynch, 
 found to the East of Usdum a pillar of salt 
 about forty feet high, which was perhaps that 
 referred to by Josephus, &c. 
 
 29. God remembered Abraham] He re- 
 membered Abraham’s intercession recorded in 
 ch. xvill. and also the covenant which He had 
 made with Abraham, and which was gra- 
 ciously extended so as to benefit his kinsman 
 Lot. 
 
 30. he feared to dwell in Zoar| Jerome 
 (‘Qu.’ ad h.l.) supposes that Lot had seen 
 Zoar so often affected by earthquakes that he 
 durst no longer abide there, see on v. 22. 
 Rashi thought that the proximity to Sodom 
 was the reason for his fear. ‘The weakness of 
 Lot’s character is seen here again, in his not 
 trusting God’s promises. 
 
 dwelt in a cave| ‘These mountainous re- 
 gions abound in caves, and the early inhabit- 
 ants formed them into dwellingplaces; see 
 on ch. xiv. 6. 
 
 31. there is not a man in the earth] Tren. 
 (Iv. 51;) Chrysostom (‘Hom. 34 in Ge- 
 nes.’), Ambros. (‘De Abrahamo,’ I. 6), Theo- 
 doret, (‘ Qu. in. Gen.’ 69), excuse this incestu- 
 ous conduct of the daughters of Lot on the 
 ground, that they supposed the whole human 
 race to have been destroyed, excepting their 
 father and themselves. Even if it were so, the 
 words of St Augustine would be true, that 
 ‘‘they should have preferred to be childless 
 rather than to treat their father so.” (Potius 
 
 GERNES TS a0 RX) 
 
 [v. 29—37-- 
 
 that we may preserve seed of our 
 father. eget 
 
 33 And they made their father 
 drink wine that night: and the first- 
 born went in, and lay with her father ; 
 and he perceived not when she lay 
 down, nor when she arose. 
 
 34 And it came to pass on the 
 morrow, that the firstborn said unto 
 the younger, Behold, | lay yesternight 
 with my father: let us make him drink 
 wine this night also; and go thou in, 
 and lie with him, that we may pre- 
 serve seed of our father. 
 
 35 And they made their father 
 drink wine that night also: and the 
 younger arose, and lay with him; and 
 he perceived not when she lay down, 
 nor when she arose. 
 
 36 Thus were both the daughters 
 of Lot with child by their father. 
 
 37 And the firstborn bare a son, 
 
 nunquam esse matres quam sic uti patre debu- 
 erunt, ‘C. Faustum,’ XXII. 43.) Itis too appa- 
 rent that the licentiousness of Sodom had had 
 a degrading influence upon their hearts and 
 lives. 
 
 32. Jet us make our father drink wine] 
 It has been suggested in excuse for Lot, that 
 his daughters drugged the wine. Of this, 
 however, there is no intimation in the text. 
 But the whole history is of the simplest cha- 
 racter. It tells plainly all the faults, not of 
 Lot only, but of Abraham and Sarah also. 
 Still though it simply relates and neither praises 
 nor blames, yet in Lot’s history we may trace 
 the judgment as well as the mercy of God. 
 His selfish choice of the plain of Jordan led 
 him perhaps to present wealth and prosperity, 
 but withal to temptation and danger. In 
 the midst of the abandoned profligacy of 
 Sodom he indeed was preserved in compara- 
 tive purity, and so, when God overthrew the 
 cities of the plain, he yet saved Lot from de- 
 struction. Still Lot’s feebleness of faith first 
 caused him to linger, v. 16, then to fear escape 
 to the mountains, v. 19, and lastly to doubt 
 the safety of the place which God had spared 
 for him, v. 30. Now again he is led by 
 his children into intoxication, which betrays 
 him, unconsciously, into far more dreadful 
 wickedness. And then we hear of him no 
 more. He is left by the sacred narrative, 
 saved indeed from the conflagration of Sodom, 
 but an outcast, widowed, homeless, hopeless, 
 without children or grandchildren, save the 
 authors and the heirs of his shame. 
 
v. 38.] 
 
 and called his name Moab: the same 
 is the father of the Moabites unto 
 this day. 
 
 38 And the younger, she also bare 
 
 87. Moab] According to the LX X.=me- 
 Gene. trom the father.* So also the 
 Targ. of Pseudo-Jonathan, Augustine, Je- 
 rome, &c. alluding to the incestuous origin of 
 Moab, ‘The Moabites dwelt originally to the 
 East of the Dead Sea, from whence they 
 expelled the Emims (Deut. ii. 11). Afterwards 
 they were driven by the Amorites to the 
 South of the river Arnon, which formed their 
 Northern boundary. 
 
 38. Ben-ammi] i. e..‘‘son of my people,” 
 in allusion to his being of unmixed race. The 
 Ammonites are said to have destroyed the 
 Zam-zummim, a tribe of the Rephaim, and to 
 have succeeded them and dwelt in their stead. 
 (Deut. il. 22.) ‘They appear for the most part 
 to have been an unsettled marauding violent 
 
 NOTE A on Cap. xXIx. 25. 
 (1) Characteristics of Dead Sea. 
 
 CtEIN BS BSe ete’, 
 
 a son, and called his name Ben- 
 ammi: the same zs the father of 
 the children of Ammon _ unto this 
 
 day. 
 
 race, of Bedouin habits, worshippers of Mo- 
 lech, ‘‘the abomination of the Ammonites.” 
 EK. Xt 7. 
 
 De Wette and his followers, Rosenmiiller, 
 Tuch, Knobel, &c. speak of this narrative, as 
 if it had arisen from the national hatred of 
 the Israelites to the Moabites and Ammonites, 
 but the Pentateuch by no means shews such 
 national hatred (see Deut. li. 9, 19): and the 
 book of Ruth gives the history of a Moabitess 
 who was ancestress of David himself. It was 
 not till the Moabites had seduced the Israelites 
 to idolatry and impurity, Num. xxv. 1, and 
 had acted in an unfriendly manner towards 
 them, hiring Balaam to curse them, that they 
 were excluded from the congregation of the 
 Lord for ever. Deut. xxiii, 3, 4. 
 
 THE DEAD SEA, SITE OF SODOM AND ZOAR. 
 Testimonies ancient and modern. 
 
 (2) Geological 
 
 formation. (3) Were Sodom, Zoar, &c. on the North or South of the Dead Sea? 
 
 THE Dead Sea, if no historical importance at- 
 tached to it, would still be the most remark- 
 able body of water in the known world, 
 Many fabulous characteristics were assigned 
 to it by ancient writers, as that birds could 
 not fly over it, that oxen and camels floated in 
 it, nothing being heavy enough to sink (Ta- 
 Priiist.) V..6; Flin. ‘H.N.’ v.16; Seneca, 
 ‘Qu. Nat.’ lib. 1.). It has been conjectured 
 by Reland, with some probability, that le- 
 gends belonging to the lake of Asphalt said to 
 have existed near Babylon (see on ch. xi. 3) 
 were mixed up with the accounts of the Dead 
 Sea, and both exaggerated (Reland, ‘ Palest.’ 
 II. pp. 244 Seq.). 
 
 The Dead Sea called in Scripture the 
 Salt Sea (Gen. xiv. 3; Numb. xxxiv. 3, 12), 
 the Sea of the Plain (Deut. iii. 17, iv. 49; 
 Josh. iti, 16), and in the later books, ‘the 
 East Sea” (Ezek. xlvii. 18; Joel ii. 20; in 
 Zech. xiv. 8, ‘‘the former sea” should be ren- 
 dered ‘‘the East Sea’’), is according to Lynch 
 4o geographical miles long by 9 to 93 broad. 
 Its depression is 1316 feet below the level of 
 the Mediterranean, Its depth in the northern 
 portion is 1308 feet. Its extreme saltness was 
 known to the ancients, Galen. (‘De Simplic. 
 Medicam, Facultat.’ c. 19) says that ‘its taste 
 was not only salt but bitter.” Modern travel- 
 lers describe the taste as most intensely and 
 intolerably salt, its specific gravity and its 
 buoyancy being consequently so great that 
 people can swim or float in it, who could not 
 swim in any other water. ‘This excessive 
 saltness is probably caused by the immense 
 
 masses of fossil salt which lie in a mountain at 
 its South-west border, and by the rapid eva- 
 poration of the fresh water, which flows into 
 it (Stanley, ‘S. and P.’ p. 2923 Robinson’s 
 ‘Phys. Geog.’ p. 195). Both ancient and 
 modern writers assert that nothing animal or 
 vegetable lives in this sea (Tacit. ‘ Hist.’ v. 6; 
 Galen. ‘ De Simpl. Med.’ Iv. 19; Hieron. ad 
 Ezech, XLVII. 18; Robinson, ‘Bib, Res.’ 11. 
 p. 226). ‘The few living creatures which the 
 Jordan washes down into it are destroyed 
 (Stanley, ‘S. and P.’ p. 293). No wonder, 
 then, that the Salt Sea should have been called 
 the Dead Sea, a name unknown to the sacred 
 writers, but common in after times, Even 
 its shores, incrusted with salt, present the ap- 
 pearance of utter desolation. The ancients 
 speak much of the masses of asphalt, or bitu- 
 men, which the lake threw up. Diodorus 
 Sic. affirms that the masses of bitumen were 
 
 like islands, covering two or three plethra 
 
 (Diod. Sic. 11. 48); and Josephus says that 
 they were of the form and magnitude of oxen 
 (‘B. J.’ Iv. 8. 4). Modern travellers testify 
 to the existence of bitumen still on the shores 
 and waters of the Dead Sea, but it is sup- 
 posed by the Arabs, that it is only thrown up 
 by earthquakes. Especially after the earth- 
 quakes of 1834 and 1837, large quantities are 
 said to have been cast upon the Southern 
 shore, probably detached by shocks from the 
 bottom of the Southern bay (Robinson, ‘B.R.’ 
 II. p. 229; ‘Physical Geog.’ p. 201. See also 
 Thomson, ‘Land and Book,’ p. 223). 
 
 There is great difference between the North- 
 
 I2 
 
 131 
 
i anal 
 
 2 SIEN E'S Toye ose 
 
 ern and Southern portions of the sea. The 
 great depth of the Northern division does not 
 extend to the South. ‘The Southern bay is 
 shallow, its shores low and marshy, almost 
 like a quicksand, (Stanley, ‘S. and P.’ p. 293). 
 It has been very generally supposed from Gen. 
 xiv. 3, that the Dead Sea now occupies the 
 site of what was originally the Plain of 
 Jordan, the vale of Siddim, and to this has 
 been added the belief that the cities of Sodom, 
 Gomorrah, &c, were situated in the vale of 
 Siddim, and that they too were covered by 
 the Dead Sea. Recent observations have led 
 many to believe that probably a lake must 
 have existed here before historic times. Yet 
 it is quite conceivable that the terrible catas- 
 trophe recorded in Genesis, traces of which 
 are visible throughout the whole region, may 
 have produced even the deep depression of 
 the bed of the Dead Sea, and so have arrested 
 the streams of the Jordan, which may before 
 that time have flowed onwards through the 
 Arabah, and emptied itself into the Gulph of 
 Akabah. At all events, it is very probable 
 that the Southern division of the lake may 
 have been formed at a comparatively recent 
 date. The character of this Southern part, 
 abounding with salt, frequently throwing up 
 bitumen, its shores producing sulphur and 
 nitre (Robinson, ‘ Phys. Geog.’ p. 204), corre-= 
 sponds accurately with all that is told us of 
 the valley of Siddim, which was ‘full of 
 slime pits” (Gen. xiv. 10), and with the his- 
 tory of the destruction of the cities by fire 
 and brimstone and the turning of Lot’s wife 
 into a pillar of salt. Very probably there- 
 fore the vale of Siddim may correspond with 
 what is now the Southern Bay of the Dead 
 Sea. ‘There is, however, no Scriptural au- 
 thority for saying that Sodom and the other 
 guilty cities were immersed in the sea. They 
 are always spoken of as overthrown by fire 
 from heaven (cf. Deut. xxix. 23; Jer. xlix. 
 18,1.40; Zeph. il. 9; 2 Pet.ii.6). And Jose- 
 phus (‘ B. J. Iv. 8. 4) speaks of ‘* Sodomitis, 
 once a prosperous country from its fertility 
 and abundance of cities, but now entirely 
 burnt up,” as adjoining the lake Asphaltites. 
 This was observed long ago by Reland (iI. p. 
 256), and is now generally admitted by tra- 
 vellers and commentators. All ancient testi- 
 mony is in favour of considering the cities of 
 
 CHAPTER XxX. 
 
 1 Abraham sojourneth at Gerar, 2 denieth his 
 wife, and loseth her. 3 Abimelech is re- 
 proved for her in a dream. 9 He rebuketh 
 Abraham, 14 restoreth Sarah, 16 and re- 
 proveth her. 7 He is healed by Abraham’s 
 
 prayer. 
 
 [v. 172. 
 
 the plain as having lain at this Southern ex- 
 tremity of the sea. ‘The general belief at pre- 
 sent that that portion only of the sea can have 
 been of recent formation, and hence that that 
 only can have occupied the site of the vale of 
 Siddim, the belief that Sodom was near the 
 vale of Siddim, the bituminous, saline, volcanic 
 aspect of the Southern coast, the traditional 
 names of Usdum, &c., the traditional site of 
 Zoar, called by Josephus (as above) Zoar of 
 Arabia, the hill of salt, said to have been Lot’s 
 wife, and every other supposed vestige of the 
 destroyed cities being to the South, all tend to 
 the general conviction that the cities of the 
 plain (of the Kikkar) lay either within or 
 around the present South bay of the Dead 
 Sea. Onthe other hand, Mr Grove (in Smith’s 
 ‘ Dict. of the Bible’) has argued with great 
 ability in favour of a Northern site for these 
 cities, and he is supported by Tristram (* Land 
 of Israel,’ pp. 360—363). The chief grounds 
 for his argument are 1st, that Abraham and 
 Lot, at or near Bethel, could have seen the 
 plain of Jordan to the North of the Dead Sea, 
 but could not have seen the Southern valleys 
 (see Gen. xill. ro): andly, that what they saw 
 was ‘the Kikkar of the Jordan,” whereas 
 the Jordan flowed into the Dead Sea at its 
 Northern extremity, but probably never flow- 
 ed to the South of that sea: 3rdly, that later 
 writers have been misled by apparent simi- 
 larity of names, by the general belief that the 
 sea had overflowed the sites of the cities and 
 by uncertain traditions. It is, however, to 
 be observed, that Mr Grove’s arguments rest 
 on two somewhat uncertain positions: first, 
 that, in Gen. xiii. ro—13, Lot must have been 
 able to see, from between Bethel and Ai, the 
 cities of the plain; whereas it is possible that 
 the language is not to be pressed too strictly, 
 Lot seeing at the time the river Jordan North 
 of the present Dead Sea, and knowing that 
 the whole valley both North and South was 
 fertile and well watered; secondly, that no 
 part of the Dead Sea can be of recent for- 
 mation, notwithstanding the terrible catas- 
 trophes all around it, to which not only Scrip- 
 ture but tradition and the present appear- 
 ance of the whole country bear testimony. 
 On the other hand, both tradition, local names 
 and local evidences are strongly in favour of 
 the Southern site of the cities destroyed. ; 
 
 ND Abraham journeyed from 
 
 thence toward the south coun- 
 
 try, and dwelled between Kadesh 
 and Shur, and sojourned in Gerar. 
 
 2 And Abraham said of Sarah his 
 
 wife, She zs my sister: and Abime- 
 
 CHAP. XX. 1. From thence] i.e. from 
 Mamre, where he had received the heavenly 
 
 visitors, and whence he had beheld the smoke 
 
 ‘from the conflagration of the cities of the plain. 
 
 i 
 
CHESTIN: laa dhe 
 
 lech king of Gerar sent, and took 
 Saralicr\ 
 3 But God came to Abimelech in 
 
 v. 3—7.] 133 
 He is my brother: in the ‘integrity 1 or, 
 of my heart and innocency of my simplicity, 
 
 . or, S272Ce- 
 hands have I done this. rity. 
 
 a dream by night, and said to him, 
 Behold, thou art but a dead man, for 
 the woman which thou hast taken; 
 
 6 And God said unto him in a 
 dream, Yea, I know that thou didst 
 this in the integrity of thy heart; for 
 
 tHeb. for she zs 'a man’s wife. I also withheld thee from sinnin 
 marred 4 But Abimelech had not come against me: therefore suffered I thee 
 husband, 
 
 near her: and he said, Lord, wilt 
 thou slay also a righteous nation? 
 
 5 Said he not unto me, She zs my 
 sister? and she, even she herself said, 
 
 not to touch her. 
 
 7 Now therefore restore the man 
 his wife; for he is a prophet, and he 
 shall pray for thee, and thou shalt 
 
 It may have been painful to him to abide in a 
 place where he would be hourly reminded of 
 this terrible catastrophe, or he may merely 
 have travelled onward in search of fresh pas- 
 turage. 
 
 dwelled between Kadesh and Shur, and so- 
 journed in Gerar| He settled apparently in a 
 fertile country lying between the two deserts 
 of Kadesh and Shur, and finally took up his 
 residence as a stranger or sojourner (so the 
 word ‘‘sojourned” signifies) at Gerar, a place 
 which, St Jerome says, was on the southern 
 border of the Canaanites. Gerar was not far 
 from Gaza (Gen. x. 19), and Beersheba (xxvi. 
 26). Its site has probably been identified by 
 Rowlands (Williams’ ‘ Holy City,’ I. 465) 
 with the traces of an ancient city now called 
 Khirbet-el-Gerar, near a deep Wady called 
 Jurf-el-Gerar, about three hours to the south- 
 south-east of Gaza. 
 
 2. She is my sister] This was Abraham’s 
 plan of action, when sojourning among 
 strangers, of whose character he was ignorant, 
 see v.13. He has been defended as having 
 <¢ said she was his sister, without denying that 
 she was his wife, concealing the truth but not 
 speaking what was false” (August. ‘c. Faust.’ 
 XXII. 3). But, though concealment may not 
 necessarily be deception, we can scarcely ac- 
 quit Abraham either of some disingenuous- 
 ness or of endangering his wife’s honour and 
 chastity, in order to save his own life. 
 
 Abimelech| Father of the king, or perhaps 
 father king, the common title of the Philistine 
 kings, as Pharaoh was of the Egyptians. ‘The 
 age at which Sarah must have been at this 
 time, some twenty-three or twenty-four years 
 older than when Pharaoh took her into his 
 house (ch. xii. 15), creates a considerable dif- 
 ficulty here. We may remember that Sarah 
 after this became a mother, that though too 
 old for childbearing under normal conditions, 
 she had had her youth renewed since the visit 
 of the angels (Kurtz), when it was promised 
 that she should have ason. ‘The assertion of 
 modern critics that this is merely another ver- 
 sion of ch. xii. 1o—20, the work of the Elohist, 
 whilst that was by the Jehovist, is ably com- 
 
 bated by Keil (p.170, Eng. Trans. p.242). He 
 observes, that the name E/ohim indicates the 
 true relation of God to Abimelech; but that 
 in v.18, JEHOVAH, the covenant God of Abra- 
 ham, interposes to save him. All the more mi- 
 nute details of this history are different from 
 that in ch. xii. In Abimelech we see a totally 
 different character from that of Pharaoh; the 
 character, namely, of a heathen imbued with 
 a moral consciousness of right and open to 
 receive a divine revelation, of which there is 
 no trace in the account of the king of Egypt. 
 It is not to be wondered at that the same 
 danger should twice have occurred to Sarah, 
 if we remember that the customs of the hea- 
 then nations, among which he was sojourning, 
 were such as to induce Abraham to use the 
 artifice of calling his wife his sister. 
 
 4. had not come near her| Apparently 
 a divinely sent illness had been upon him, 
 vv. 6, 18. 
 
 a righteous nation] i.e, a nation guiltless as 
 regards this act of their king; but it may be, 
 that the people of Gerar were really exempt 
 from the worst vices of Canaan, and living in 
 a state of comparative piety and simplicity. 
 
 6. suffered I thee not to touch her| See 
 On Vv. 4- 
 
 7. he is a prophet] i.e, one inspired by 
 God, or the medium of God’s communications 
 and revelations to mankind. ‘Thus Exod. vii.1, 
 Aaron is said to be Moses’ prophet, because 
 he was to convey the messages and commands 
 of Moses to Pharaoh. An objection has been 
 made to the antiquity of the Pentateuch from 
 the statement in 1 S. ix. 9, that ‘he that is 
 now called a Prophet was beforetime called a 
 Seer.” Hence it is argued that the Pentateuch, 
 which always uses the word prophet, cannot 
 be of the great antiquity assigned to it. The 
 difficulty is only on the surface. ‘‘ Prophet” 
 was the genuine name applied to all who de- 
 clared God’s will, who foretold the future, 
 or even to great religious teachers. ‘‘ Seer” 
 had a more restricted sense, and was appro- 
 priated to those only who were favoured 
 with visions from heaven. ‘The word prophet 
 occurs constantly in the Pentateuch in the 
 
134 
 
 live: and if thou restore her not, 
 know thou that thou shalt surely die, 
 thou, and all that @re thine. 
 
 8 Therefore Abimelech rose early 
 in the morning, and called all his 
 servants, and told all these things in 
 their ears: and the men were sore 
 afraid. 
 
 g Then Abimelech called Abra- 
 ham, and said unto him, What hast 
 thou done unto us? and what have 
 I offended thee, that thou hast brought 
 on me and on my kingdom a great 
 sin? thou hast done deeds unto me 
 that ought not to be done. 
 
 10 And Abimelech said unto Abra- 
 ham, What sawest thou, that thou 
 hast done this thing? 
 
 1z1 And Abraham said, Because I 
 thought, Surely the fear of God is 
 not in this place; and they will slay 
 me for my wife’s sake. 
 
 general sense of one in communion with God, 
 and made the medium of God’s communica- 
 tions to man. ‘The word ‘‘seer” would gen- 
 erally be out of place in such a passage as this, 
 or such as Ex. vii. 1, xv. 20; Num. xi. 29, 
 xil. 6, &c.; but in the time of Samuel, when 
 “the word of the Lorp was precious there 
 was no open vision,” (1 S. iii. 1;) the appli- 
 cation of the title ‘‘ seer” to Samuel, who had 
 visions specially vouchsafed to him, was very 
 appropriate; yet after his time, though the 
 name was sometimes employed to designate 
 the inspired teachers of mankind, the older 
 and more comprehensive title of ‘‘ prophet” 
 again came into common use, not only for 
 teachers of religion generally, but also for the 
 most favoured of God’s servants. (See ‘ Mosaic 
 Origin of the Pentateuch,’ by a Layman, 
 
 P- 97+) 
 
 he shall pray for thee] As the prophets 
 were the instruments of God’s revelations, 
 His messengers, to man; so men made the 
 prophets instruments for sending their prayers 
 up to God (Cleric.). Cp. Jer. vii. 16, xi. 14, 
 XIV. II. 
 
 10. What sawest thou] Many recent 
 commentators, Knobel, Delitzsch, Keil, &c., 
 render, ‘‘ What hadst thou in view?” ‘The 
 more simple sense is, what didst thou see in 
 the conduct and manners of me or my people, 
 that thou shouldest have done so tous? Didst 
 thou see us taking away the wives of strangers 
 and murdering the husbands? 
 
 11. Surely the fear of God is not in this 
 place] Abraham had seen the impiety and 
 
 GENESIS. XX. 
 
 [v. 8—16. 
 
 12 And yet indeed she zs my sister ; 
 she zs the daughter of my father, but 
 not the daughter of my mother; and 
 she became my wife. 
 
 13 And it came to pass, when God 
 caused me to wander from my father’s 
 house, that I said unto her, This zs 
 thy kindness which thou shalt shew 
 unto me; at every place whither we 
 
 shall come, “say of me, He zs my ® chap. 12. 
 
 brother. - 
 
 14. And Abimelech took sheep, and 
 oxen, and menservants, and women- 
 servants, and gave them unto Abra- 
 ham, and restored him Sarah _ his 
 wife. : 
 
 15 And Abimelech said, Behold, 
 my land zs before thee: dwell ‘where t Heb. 
 it pleaseth thee. 
 
 16 And unto Sarah he said, Behold, ?* 
 I have given thy brother a thousand 
 pieces of silver: behold, he zs to thee 
 
 heathenism of the Canaanitish races, and had 
 lately witnessed the overthrow of Sodom for 
 the licentiousness of its people, and he natu- 
 rally thought that the inhabitants of Gerar 
 might be equally forgetful of God, and there- 
 fore prone to all wickedness. 
 
 12. she is my sister; she is the daughter of 
 my father, but not the daughter of my mother | 
 Sarah’s name does not occur in the genea- 
 logies, and we do aot know any thing of her 
 birth but that which is here stated. Such 
 marriages, though afterwards forbidden (Ley. 
 XVIll. 9, II, xx. 17; Deut. xxvii. 22), may 
 not have been esteemed unlawful in patri- 
 archal times, and they were common among 
 the heathen nations of antiquity (Ach. Tatius, 
 Lib. 1.; Diod. 1. 27; Herod. 111. 31; Nepos, 
 ‘Cimon,’ c. r.) Many Jewish and Christian 
 interpreters, however, think that daughter here 
 means granddaughter, and that Sarah was the 
 same as Iscah, the sister of Lot (ch. xi. 29), 
 who is called “the brother of Abraham” (ch. 
 Xiv. 16). 
 
 13. God caused me to wander] In general 
 the name of Gop (Elohim), though of plural 
 form, is joined with a singular verb. In this 
 case, however, the verb isin the plural. Similar 
 constructions occur ch. xxxv. 7; Exod. xxii. 85 
 2S. vil. 23; (cp. 1 Chr. xvii. 21); Ps. Iviii. 12. 
 In Josh, xxiv. 19, the adjective is in the plural. 
 The Samaritan Pentateuch here and in ch. 
 xxxv. 7 has the verb in the singular. 
 
 16. a thousand pieces of silver] Lit. “a 
 thousand of silver.” ‘The versions insert ‘‘she- 
 kels” or ‘‘didrachmas;” nothing can be known 
 of the weights and measures of this early time. 
 
 as is g0cd 
 in thine 
 
ve17+6.] GENESIS. 
 a covering of the eyes, unto all that 
 are with thee, and with all other: thus 
 she was reproved. 
 
 17. 4 So Abraham prayed unto 
 God: and God healed Abimelech, 
 
 and his wife, and his maidservants ; 
 
 ASIEN I, 
 
 ND the Lorp visited Sarah as he 
 had said, and the Lorn did 
 unto Sarah “as he had spoken. 
 2 For Sarah ¢conceived, and: bare #418. 10, 
 Abraham a son in his old age, at the Gis 7,® 
 set time of which God had spoken to Heb. 1. 
 
 him. 
 
 135 
 
 @ chap. 17. 
 
 and they bare children. 
 
 18 For the Lorp had fast closed 
 up all the wombs of the house of 
 Abimelech, because of Sarah Abra- 
 ham’s wife. 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 1 Lsaac ts born. 4 He is circumcised. 6 Sarah's 
 joy. 9 Hagar and Ishmael are cast forth. 
 
 15 Hagar in distress. 17 The angel com- 
 forteth her. 22 Abimelech’s covenant with 
 Abraham at Beer-sheba. 
 
 Probably the thousand pieces of silver indicate 
 the value of the sheep and oxen, which Abi- 
 melech gave to Abraham, though some think 
 it was an additional present. 
 
 16. he is to thee a covering of the eyes] 
 There is great variety of opinion as to the 
 sense of these words. If we follow the ren- 
 dering of the Authorized Version, the most 
 probable interpretation is that of Heidegger, 
 Schroeder, Rosenmiiller, &c., viz. this, that in 
 early times in the East unmarried women often 
 went unveiled, but married women always 
 veiled themselves. Cp. Gen. xxiv. 65. Hence 
 Abimelech meant to say, that Abraham should 
 be like a veil to Sarah, screening her from the 
 eyes of all other men. See Rosenm. in loc. 
 Heidegger, 11. p. 163. ‘The words might have 
 been rendered, as by the LX X., Vulg., Targg., 
 Syr., “it” or “they,” z.e. the one thousand 
 pieces of silver ‘‘ are to thee a covering of the 
 eyes,” in which case the meaning would pro- 
 bably be ‘‘this gift is to thee for a covering to 
 the eyes, so that thou. shouldest overlook or 
 condone the injury done to thee.” So St 
 Chrysostom, and among moderns, Gesenius, 
 Tuch, Knobel, &c. 
 
 thus. she was reproved| Here also there is 
 great diversity of interpretation; but the Au- 
 thorized Version is probably correct, and we 
 must understand the words to be those of the 
 historian, not of Abimelech. So apparently 
 Onk., Arab., Saad., Kimchi, Gesen., Rosenm., 
 &e. 
 
 18. the Lorp] Keil has observed, that 
 the various names of the Most High are used 
 very significantly in these two last verses. The 
 care of Abimelech and his wives belonged to 
 the Deity (Elohim). Abraham directed his 
 intercession not to E/ohim, an indefinite and 
 unknown god, but to Ha-Elohim, ‘‘the” true 
 *‘God;” and it was JEHOVAH, the covenant 
 
 3 And Abraham called the name 
 of his son that was born unto him, 
 whom Sarah bare to him, Isaac. 
 
 4 And Abraham circumcised his 
 son Isaac being eight days old, “as God « 
 had commanded him. f 
 
 5 And Abraham was an hundred 
 years old, when his son Isaac was 
 born unto him. 
 
 6 @ And Sarah said, God hath 
 
 God, who interposed for Abraham and pre- 
 
 served the mother of the promised seed. 
 
 CHAP. XXI. 1. the Lorp did unto Sarah 
 as he had spoken] In ch. xvil.16, GOD pro- 
 mised that He would give Abraham a son 
 by Sarah his wife, on which promise Abra- 
 ham fell on his face and laughed, whether 
 from incredulity or for joy. What God (Elo- 
 him) then promised here the LORD (JEHO- 
 VAH) fulfils. 
 
 2. at the set time of which God had spoken 
 to him] ‘The ‘‘set time” was fixed, ch. xvii. 
 21, and xvili. Io, 144 (See note on ch. xvili. 
 to.) Modern critics see in ch. xvii. and in 
 this ch, xxi, an Elohistic portion of the his- 
 tory of Abraham, and in ch. xviii. a Jeho- 
 vistic portion, Yet this present chapter seems 
 clearly to point back to both ch, xvii, and ch, 
 XVili., and in its first verse it uses twice the 
 name JEHOVAH, whilst in the second and 
 subsequent verses it has constantly the name 
 Elohim until we come to v. 33, when both 
 names are conjoined, for Abraham is said to 
 have called on the name of ‘‘ The Lorp, the 
 everlasting God,” 
 
 8. Isaac] The name which God had ap- 
 pointed for him, ch, xvii, 19, See also note 
 on ch, xviii. 12. 
 
 6. God hath made me to laugh| What- 
 ever was the nature of Sarah’s laughter when 
 the promise was made to her (see ch. xviii. 
 12), she now acknowledges that God had 
 made her to laugh for joy; and she recognizes 
 that He, whom she then took for a traveller 
 and who made the promise, at which she 
 laughed, was truly Gop, 
 
 will laugh with me] ‘The Hebrew might 
 mean ‘“Jaugh at me” or ‘‘laugh with me.” 
 The Authorised Version rightly follows the 
 LXX., Vulg., Targg., &c. ; 
 
136 
 
 made me to laugh, so that all that 
 hear will laugh with me. | 
 
 7 And she said, Who would have 
 said unto Abraham, that Sarah should 
 have given children suck? for I have 
 born him a son in his old age. 
 
 8 And the child grew, and was 
 weaned: and Abraham made a great 
 feast the same day that Isaac was 
 weaned. 
 
 9 § And Sarah saw the son of 
 Hagar the Egyptian, which she had 
 born unto Abraham, mocking. 
 
 10 Wherefore she said unto Abra- 
 ham, @Cast out this bondwoman and 
 her son: for the son of this bond- 
 
 GENESISJ°Ae 
 
 [v. 714. 
 
 woman shall not be heir with my son, 
 even with Isaac. 
 
 11 And the thing was very griev- 
 ous in Abraham’s sight because of his 
 son. } | 
 12 4 And God said unto Abraham, 
 Let it not be grievous in thy sight 
 because of the lad, and because of thy 
 bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath 
 said unto thee, hearken unto her 
 voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be 
 called. 
 
 13 And also of the son of the bond- 
 woman will I make a nation, because 
 he zs thy seed. 
 
 14 And Abraham rose up early in 
 
 7. Who would have said| ‘The render- 
 ing of the Authorised Version is most like- 
 ly correct. The obscurity. of the passage 
 probably arises from its poetical form, It 
 has been long ago observed, that the words 
 are apparently those of a short poem or hymn, 
 like the hymn of Hannah, 1 S. ii. r—7, or 
 the Magnificat of the Blessed Virgin, Luke 1. 
 46—55, the resemblance to which is the more 
 noticeable, as Isaac was an eminent type of 
 the Lord Jesus (see Wordsworth ad loc.), 
 That these words were of the nature of a 
 hymn or poem is seen in the use of a poetical 
 word (millel) for ‘‘said,” instead of the more 
 common words (dibber or amar); and also in 
 the appearance of regular parallelism of the 
 members of the sentence. 
 
 8. the child grew, and was weaned] From 
 TSH haga 3) 2.vlacc. tile a7 5 hf oseph, 
 ‘ Ant,’ II. 9. 6, it has been inferred that chil- 
 dren were not weaned among the Hebrews 
 till they were three years old, Ishmael was 
 thirteen years old when he was circumcised, 
 ch. xvii. 25, and one year after Isaac was 
 born, ch, xvii. 21. If therefore Isaac was 
 three years old at his weaning, Ishmael must 
 have been then seventeen, If Isaac was but 
 one year old, Ishmael would have been fifteen, 
 
 made a great feast] By comparing 1 S. 
 i. 24, 25, it would seem that this was very 
 probably a religious feast, 
 
 9. mocking| ‘The word, which natural- 
 ly means ¢o /augh, is rendered by the LXX, 
 and Vulg., ‘‘playing with Isaac.” ‘Tuch, 
 Knobel, &c. say the word means merely, 
 ‘¢playing like a child.” Gesenius thinks it 
 was ‘playing and dancing gracefully,” and 
 so attracting the favour of his father, which 
 moved the envy of Sarah, The Targum of 
 Onkelos appears to give the sense of ‘ de- 
 
 riding” (see Buxtorf, ‘Lex. Chald, and Tal- 
 mud,’ p. 719), as does the Syriac, The later’ 
 Targums (Pseudo-Jon, and Jerusalem) un-: 
 derstand some acts of idolatrous worship or 
 perhaps impurity, (comp. Ex. xxxiil, 6, where 
 the same word is used for ‘‘ play,” and 1 Cor. 
 x. 7). It is quite untrue that the word 
 ‘*Jaugh,” here rendered ‘‘ mocking,” is never 
 used but in a good sense, In ch, xix, 14, it 
 is rightly rendered ‘‘ mocked.” See also Gen, 
 XXVi. 8, XXXIX, 14, 175 Ex. xxxil. 6, It pro- 
 bably means in this passage, as it has generally 
 been understood, ‘‘mocking laughter.” As 
 Abraham had laughed for joy concerning 
 Isaac, and Sarah had laughed incredulously, so 
 now Ishmael laughed in derision, and proba- 
 bly in a persecuting and tyrannical spirit 
 (see Gal. iv. 29). 
 
 10. Cast out] ‘These words are quoted 
 by St Paul (Gal. iv. 30), introduced by ‘‘ But 
 what saith the Scripture?” ‘The words were 
 those of Sarah, but they are confirmed by the 
 Almighty, v. 12. 
 
 12. in Isaac shall thy seed be called] Here 
 is the distinct limitation of the great pro- 
 mises of God to the descendants of Abra- 
 ham in the line of Isaac (see Rom. ix. 7), 
 God’s promises gradually developed them- 
 selves in fulness, and yet were gradually re- 
 stricted in extent: to Adam first; then to 
 Noah; to Abraham; then to one race or seed 
 of Abraham, viz. Isaac; to one of Isaac’s 
 children, viz, Jacob; to one of the twelve pa- 
 triarchs, viz, Judah; then to his descendant 
 David; and lastly to the great Son of David, 
 the true promised Seed; but as all centred in 
 Him, so too from Him they have spread out 
 to all redeemed by Him, though more espe- 
 cially taking effect in those, who are ‘the 
 children of God by faith in Christ Jesus” 
 (Gal, ili, 26), 
 
v. I5—17. | 
 
 the morning, and took bread, and a 
 bottle of water, and gave it unto 
 Hagar, putting zt on her shoulder, and 
 the child, and sent her away: and she 
 departed, and wandered in the wilder- 
 ness of Beer-sheba. 
 
 15 And the water was spent in the 
 bottle, and she cast the child under 
 one of the shrubs. 
 
 14, a bottle} A skin or leathern bot- 
 tle, probably made of the skin of a goat or a 
 kid, (See the word dozt/e in Smith’s ‘ Dict. of 
 the Bible.’) 
 
 putting it on her shoulder] Wagar was an 
 Egyptian, and Herod. (11. 35) says that the 
 women in Egypt carried burdens on their 
 shoulders, but the men carried them on their 
 heads, According to the testimony of the 
 sculptures both men and women carried bur- 
 dens on their shoulders, It is common now 
 in the East to see women carrying skins of 
 water in this way, (See Robinson, ‘B, R.’ 1. 
 P. 340, II. pp. 163, 276.) 
 
 and the child| ‘The sacred writer has been 
 charged with an anachronism here, both from 
 his use of the word ‘‘ child,” when Ishmael 
 must have been from fifteen to seventeen 
 years old (see note on v. 8), and because it is 
 said that the original indicates that he, as well 
 as the bread and water, was placed on Ha- 
 gar’s shoulder, The word for ‘child” (ye- 
 led), however, is used for boys of adolescent 
 age, as in Gen. xlii. 22, of Joseph, when he 
 was seventeen, It is true, the Vatican MS, 
 of the LXX, renders ‘‘he placed the boy on 
 her shoulders,” which Tuch adopts as the 
 right rendering; but the Alexandrian MS, of 
 the LXX, has simply ‘‘and the boy,” whilst 
 the Vulg., Targg., Syr., connect the words 
 ‘putting it on her shoulder” only with the 
 bread and the bottle of water, which is per- 
 fectly consistent with the Hebrew, whether 
 the verb be rendered by the past tense, or, as 
 probably with accuracy in the Authorised 
 Version, by the participle. The promise, 
 which Abraham had just received, that God 
 would make a nation of Ishmael also, v. 13, 
 may probably have led him to trust that the 
 boy and his mother would be provided for, 
 and so to leave them with only provision for 
 their immediate wants, 
 
 in the wilderness of Beer-sheba| Abraham, 
 who had been now for at least a year dwell- 
 ing in the neighbourhood of Gerar (ch. xx, 1), 
 may very probably have by this time taken 
 up his residence at Beersheba (see vv. 33, 34). 
 ‘The name Beersheba is here given prolepti- 
 cally (see v. 31), unless the events in the lat- 
 ter part of this chapter took place before 
 
 GEN ESISA x Oh 
 
 16 And she went, and sat her down 
 over against him a good way off, as it 
 were a bowshot: for she said, Let me 
 not see the death of the child. And 
 she sat over against him, and lift up 
 her voice, and wept. 
 
 17 And God heard the voice of the 
 Jad; and the angel of God called to 
 
 Hagar out of heaven, and said unto 
 
 those in the former part, not having been re- 
 lated at first, lest there should be a break in 
 the continuity of the history of Isaac and 
 Ishmael, 
 
 15. she cast the child under one of the 
 shrubs| From this expression again it is in- 
 ferred that Ishmael must have been a child in 
 arms, Such a conclusion, however, is not 
 borne out by these words, nor by the whole 
 narrative. ‘The boy was young, but he was 
 evidently old enough to give offence to Sarah 
 by mocking (v. 9). At a time when human 
 life was much longer than it is now (Ishmael 
 himself died at 137), fifteen or sixteen would 
 be little removed from childhood, The grow- 
 ing lad would easily be exhausted with the 
 heat and wandering; whilst the hardy habits 
 of the Egyptian handmaid would enable her 
 to endure much greater fatigue. She had 
 hitherto led the boy by the hand, now she left 
 him fainting and prostrate under the shelter 
 of atree. (So Le Clerc followed by Rosen- 
 miiller.) 
 
 16. a good way off, as it were a bow- 
 shot} Lit. ‘‘as far off as the drawers of a 
 bow,” or ‘¢as they who draw a bow,” i.e. as 
 far as archers can shoot an arrow, 
 
 17. the angel of God| No where else in 
 Genesis does this name occur, Elsewhere it 
 is always ‘“‘the Angel of the Lorp.” We 
 meet with it again in Exod, xiv, 19, ‘¢ And 
 the Angel of God, which went before the 
 camp of Israel, removed, and went behind 
 them.” ‘The identification of the Malach Elo- 
 him with Elohim (cp. vv. 17, 19, 20,) here is 
 exactly like the identification of the Malach 
 JEHOVAH with JEHOVAH in other passages ; 
 a clear proof that there is not that difference 
 between the Elohistic and Jehovistic passages 
 in the Pentateuch, of which so much has been 
 written. In ch. xvi. 7, whilst Hagar was 
 still Abraham’s secondary wife, we read that 
 the Angel of the Lorn, the covenant God of 
 Abraham, appeared to her. She and her son, 
 by Isaac’s birth and their expulsion from 
 Abraham’s household, are now separated from 
 the family and covenant of promise, yet still 
 objects of care to Him who is ‘‘ the God of 
 the spirits of all flesh,” and ‘of all the en 
 of the earth.” 
 
 137 
 
t Heb. 
 tf thou 
 shalt lie 
 27220 I1€6 
 
 her, What aileth thee, Hagar? fear 
 not; for God hath heard the voice of 
 the lad where he zs. 
 
 18 Arise, lift up the lad, and hold 
 him in thine hand; for I will make 
 him a great nation. | 
 
 1g And God opened her eyes, and 
 she saw a well of water; and she 
 went, and filled the bottle with water, 
 and gave the lad drink. 
 
 20 And God was with the lad; and 
 he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness, 
 and became an archer. 
 
 21 And he dwelt in the wilderness 
 of Paran: and his mother took him a 
 
 wife out of the land of Egypt. 
 
 22 { And it came to pass at that 
 time, that Abimelech and Phichol 
 
 the chief captain of his host spake 
 -unto Abraham, saying, God zs with 
 thee in all that thou doest: 
 
 23 Now therefore swear unto me 
 here by God ‘that thou wilt not deal 
 falsely with me, nor with my son, nor 
 with my son’s son: but according to 
 the kindness that I have done unto 
 thee, thou shalt do unto me, and to 
 the land wherein thou hast sojourned. 
 
 GENESIS. XXTI. 
 
 [v. 18—32. 
 
 24 And Abraham said, I will swear. 
 
 25 And Abraham reproved Abi- 
 melech because of a well of water, 
 which Abimelech’s servants had vio- 
 lently taken away. 
 
 26 And Abimelech said, I wot not 
 who hath done this thing: neither 
 didst thou tell me, neither yet heard 
 I of it, but to day... 2: ES 
 
 27 And Abraham took sheep and 
 oxen, and gave them unto Abimelech ; 
 and both of them made a covenant. — 
 
 28 And Abraham set seven ewe - 
 lambs of the flock by themselves. 
 
 29 And Abimelech said unto Abra- 
 ham, What mean these seven ewe — 
 lambs which thou hast set by them- 
 selves? 
 
 30 And he said, For these seven — 
 ewe lambs shalt thou take of my hand, | 
 that they may be a witness unto me, 
 that I have digged this well. 
 
 31 Wherefore he called that place 
 ' Beer-sheba; because there they sware ! 
 both of them. i 
 
 32 Thus they made a covenant at 
 Beer-sheba; then Abimelech rose up, 
 and Phichol the chief captain of his 
 
 18. Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him 
 in thine hand] So the Versions, according 
 to the common use of the same verb with 
 the same preposition, Cp. Deut. xxii, 25; 
 Judg. xix. 25, 29; 2S, xiii. rr, &c.; and see 
 Gesen, ‘Thes.”’ p. 463. ‘‘From this,” says 
 St Jerome, ‘‘it is plain that the boy whom 
 she held in her hand had been her companion 
 on the journey, not a burden on her shoul- 
 ders,” ‘Qu, in Gen’, 
 
 19. God opened her eyes, and she saw a 
 well of water| Very probably the mouth of 
 the well had been purposely covered by the in- 
 habitants of the desert, and was now by God’s 
 gracious intervention discovered to Hagar, 
 
 21. in the wilderness of Paran| (See on 
 ch. xiv. 6). Probably the great desert, now 
 called the desert El-Tih, 7. e. ‘the wander- 
 ings,” extending from the Wady-el-Arabah 
 on the east, to the gulf of Suez on the west, 
 and from the Sinaitic range on the south to 
 the borders of Palestine on the north. 
 
 took him a wife out of the land of Egypt] 
 According to the custom then prevalent in 
 the East for parents to choose wives for their 
 sons, (See ch. xxiv. 4, 55; Exod. xxi. ro.) 
 
 22. Phichol| ‘The name occurs again in 
 
 ch. xxvi. 26, and, as it signifies ‘‘the mouth 
 of all,” it has been supposed to have been the 
 name of an officer, the grand vizier or prime 
 minister of the king, through whom all com- 
 plaints and petitions were to be made to him. 
 Abimelech was also an official name. See on 
 ch.’xx. 2. 
 
 23. that thou wilt not deal, falsely with 
 me] Lit. ‘if thou shalt lie unto me;” the 
 common form of an oath in Hebrew. See 
 above, on xiv. 23. 
 
 31. Beer-sheba] i.e. ‘the well of the 
 oath,” or, it might be, ‘the well of the 
 seven.” ‘There was a connection between the 
 sacred number seven and an oath; oaths being 
 ratified with the sacrifice of seven victims or 
 by the gift of seven gifts (as seems to have 
 been the case here), or confirmed by seven 
 witnesses and pledges. (See Herod. 111. 8; 
 Hom. ‘Il.’ x1x. 243). ‘Beer-sheba was in the 
 Wady-es-Seba, a wide water-course or bed 
 of a torrent, twelve hours south of Hebron, 
 in which there are still relics of an ancient 
 town or village, called Bir-es-Seba, with two 
 deep wells of good water. See Robinson, 
 ‘B. R.’ 1. p. 204, seq. St Jerome speaks of 
 the city as remaining in his day (‘Qu.ad Gen.’ 
 XXIU3I). ey + oe 
 
 That is, 
 of the 
 
_ tree. 
 
 33 —1. | 
 
 host, and they returned into the land 
 of the Philistines. 
 33 1 And Abraham planted a' grove 
 in Beer-sheba, and called there on the 
 “name of the Lorn, the everlasting 
 God. 
 34 And Abraham sojourned in the 
 
 Philistines’ land many days. 
 
 83. Abraham planted a grove| Rather 
 atamarisk tree. ‘This is the rendering of 
 Kimchi, which is adopted by Gesenius (‘ Th.’ 
 p. 159), Rosenm., and most of the German 
 critics. (The ancient versions vary very much 
 in their interpretation.) ‘The hardiness of this 
 evergreen shrub would fit it to be a perpetual 
 memorial to Abraham and his followers that 
 this well was theirs. 
 
 the Lorp, the everlasting God| ‘* JEHO- 
 VAH, the God of eternity.” ‘The word, ren- 
 dered everlasting, means probably ‘‘the hidden 
 time,” that, whose beginning and ending are 
 hidden in darkness, hence ‘‘eternity” (Ges. 
 ‘Th.’ p. 1035). It signifies also ‘‘the world,” 
 ‘the universe,” and hence, according to Mai- 
 monides, it means here the God of the uni- 
 verse, the Creator of the world. So the 
 Samaritan, Syr., and Arab. versions. The 
 more probable sense, however, is that given 
 in the Authorised Version, which corresponds 
 with the LXX., Vulg., Onk., and other 
 Targg. The JEHOvAH whom Abraham 
 worshipped is here identified with ‘‘ El-Olam,” 
 the God of eternity, which was very probably 
 a local name for the supreme Being, Com- 
 pare ‘‘ Elion” in ch, xiv. 22. 
 
 _CHap. XXII. 1. And it came to pass 
 after these things| ‘This is the only note of 
 time that we have in this chapter, excepting 
 the fact that Isaac was now grown old enough 
 to bear the wood of the burnt offering, and to 
 carry it up the mountain. ‘The words ‘after 
 these things,” rather refer us to all that had 
 been passing before. Abraham, after long 
 wanderings and many trials, is presented to us 
 in the last chapter, as eminently comforted 
 and in a condition of peaceful prosperity. 
 The promised, longed-for son has been given 
 to him; his other son Ishmael, though no 
 longer in his household, is growing up and 
 prospering, Abraham is in treaty and at peace 
 with his neighbours the Philistines, he sojourns 
 for many days at Beer-sheba and its neigh- 
 bourhood, with abundance of cattle, in a 
 place well watered and fertile. ‘Thus it ap- 
 pears to have been with him till now, when 
 his son, his only son Isaac, whom he loved, is 
 growing up to early manhood, his chief com- 
 fort and stay and hope in this world. But 
 times of prosperity are often times when trial 
 is needed for us, and so we find it here. ‘There 
 
 GENTS ES kel eX IT. 
 
 CHAPTER: XXII. 
 
 1 Abraham is tempted to offer Isaac. .3 He 
 giveth proof of his faith and obedience. 11 
 The angel stayeth him. 13 Lsaac is exchanged 
 with aram. 14 The place is called Fehovah- 
 jireh. 15 Abraham is blessed again. 20 The ° 
 generation of Nahor unto Rebekah, 
 
 ND it came to pass after these , 
 
 things, that *God did tempt ee 
 
 is great variety of tradition, but no evidence, 
 as to the age of Isaac in this chapter. Ac- 
 cording to Josephus (‘ Ant.’ I. 14), he was 
 twenty-five. Aben-Ezra supposes that he 
 was only thirteen, whilst some of the rabbins 
 put him even at thirty-seven (see Heidegger, 
 II. 282), 
 
 God did tempt Abraham] Lit. ‘‘The God 
 did tempt,” &c. possibly referring to the 
 last two verses of the last chapter (where JE- 
 HOVAH is called El-olam), meaning ‘this 
 same God.” Much difficulty has been most 
 needlessly found in these words, St James 
 tells us (1, 13) that ‘‘ God cannot be tempted 
 with evil, neither tempteth He any man,” 
 language which it has been thought difficult 
 to reconcile with this history in Genesis. So, 
 some have endeavoured to explain away the 
 words of this passage, as though Abraham 
 had felt a strong temptation rising in his own 
 heart, a temptation from Satan, or from self, 
 a horrible thought raised perhaps by witness- 
 ing the human sacrifices of the Phoenicians, 
 and had then referred the instigation to God, 
 thinking he was tempted from above, whereas 
 the real temptation was from beneath. ‘The 
 difficulty, however, has arisen from not ob- 
 serving the natural force of the word here 
 rendered ‘‘did tempt,” and the ordinary use 
 of that word in the language of the Old 
 ‘Testament, especially of the Pentateuch, 
 According to the highest authorities, the pri- 
 mary sense of the verb corresponds with that 
 of a similar word in Arabic, viz. ‘‘to smell,” 
 and thence ‘‘to test by smelling” (see Ges. 
 ‘'Thes,’ p. 889, and the testimonies there cited). 
 Hence it came to signify close, accurate, deli- 
 cate testing or trying. It is translated by 
 ‘¢ prove,” ‘‘ assay,” ‘‘adventure,” ‘‘try,” and 
 that very much more frequently than it is 
 translated by ‘‘tempt.” For instance, David 
 would not take the sword and armour of 
 Saul, because he had not ‘‘proved them,” 
 1 S. xvil. 39. Again, he prayed in the words 
 ‘examine me, O Lorp, and prove me” (Ps. 
 XXVl. 2); and in very numerous and familiar 
 passages in the Pentateuch, we read of God 
 ‘‘ proving” men, whether they would be obe- 
 dient or disobedient, the same Hebrew verb 
 being constantly made use of. (See Ex. xv. 
 25, XVi. 4, xx, 20; Deut. iv. 34, Viil. 2, 16, 
 xiii. 3, xxxiii, 8), Accordingly, whilst most 
 of the versions adhere closely to the sense of 
 
 ee © 
 
GENESTS..e4:.25 
 
 Abraham, and said unto him, Abra- 
 ham: and he said, ‘Behold, here I 
 a 
 
 140 [v. 2. 
 
 2 And he said, Take now thy son, 
 
 t Heb. thine only sox Isaac, whom thou lovest, 
 
 Behold me. 
 
 ‘“‘try,” tentare, in this passage, the Arabic 
 renders it very correctly, ‘‘God did prove 
 Abraham.” Words having the sense of ‘‘try” 
 may generally be used either in a good ora 
 bad sense. ‘This particular word has gener- 
 ally a good sense, except where men are said 
 to try or tempt God, e.g. Ex. xvii. 2; Num. 
 xiv, 22; Deut. vi.16; Ps, Ixxviii. 18; cvi. 14, 
 &c. The whole history of Abraham is a 
 history of his moral and spiritual education 
 by the teaching of God himself. He was to 
 be the head of the chosen seed, the father of 
 the faithful, himself the type of justifying 
 faith, Here then, after long schooling and 
 training, in which already there had been 
 many trials (such as his first call, his danger 
 in Egypt, his circumcision, his parting with 
 Lot, &c. &c.), one great test of his now 
 matured and strengthened faith is ordained 
 by God. We have many instances of the 
 trial of men’s faith by the Most High. One 
 remarkable example is that recorded in Matt. 
 xix. 21. It cannot be that He who sees the 
 heart needs such trials for His own informa- 
 tion; but it is important for our instruction 
 and correction, for example to future ages, 
 and for the vindication of God’s justice, that 
 such trials should be permitted, and that so 
 men’s characters should be drawn out and ex- 
 hibited to themselves and others. So St Au- 
 gustine, ‘‘all temptation is not to be blamed, 
 but that whereby probation is made is rather 
 to be welcomed. For the most part a man’s 
 spirit cannot be known to himself, unless his 
 strength be proved not by word but by actual 
 trial.” (‘De Civit. Dei,’ xvI. 32. See also 
 Ambros, ‘De Abr.’ I. 8.) 
 
 2. Take now thy son, thine only son] In 
 more ways than one Isaac might be called 
 his ‘‘only son.” He was the only son by his 
 wife Sarah: he was the only son of promise, 
 and to whom the promises were given and 
 assured: by the expulsion of Hagar and Ish- 
 mael he was the only son left to his father’s 
 house, The rendering therefore of the LXX, 
 ‘‘beloved” is not necessary. ‘The words, em- 
 phatic as they are, ‘‘Thy son, thine only son, 
 whom thou lovest,” are all calculated to im- 
 press and enhance the sacrifice which Abra- 
 ham is called on to make. 
 
 Moriah| ‘The meaning of the name seems 
 clearly to be Mori-jah, ‘‘the vision” or ‘‘the 
 manifested of JEHOVAH.” To this root it 
 is evidently referred by Sym., Vulg. (‘‘the land 
 of vision”), Aq. (‘‘the conspicuous land”), 
 LXX. (‘the lofty land”). In 2 Chr. iii, 1, 
 Solomon is said to have built his temple on 
 Mount Moriah; and the Jewish tradition 
 (Joseph, ‘ Ant.’ I. 13.2; VII. 13.4) has iden~ 
 
 mM. and get thee into the land of Moriah; 
 
 tified this Mount Moriah of the temple with 
 the mountain in the land of Moriah, on which 
 Abraham was to offer his son, whence proba- 
 bly here Onkelos and the Arab, render ‘‘the 
 land of worship.” No sufficient reason has 
 been alleged against this identification except 
 that in v. 4, it is said that ‘‘ Abraham lifted up 
 his eyes, and saw the place afar off,” whereas 
 Mount Zion is said not to be conspicuous 
 from a great distance, ‘Thence Bleek, De 
 Wette, Tuch, Stanley (‘S. and P.’ p. 251, 
 ‘ Jewish Church,’ I. 49), and Grove (‘ Dict. 
 of Bible,’ s. v. Moriah), have referred to Moreh 
 (Gen, xil. 6), and attempted to identify the 
 site of the sacrifice with ‘‘the natural altar on 
 the summit of Mount Gerizim,” which the 
 Samaritans assert to be the scene of the sacri- 
 fice. Really, however, the words in v. 4, 
 mean nothing more than this, that Abraham 
 saw the spot to which he had been directed at 
 some little distance off, not farther than the 
 character of the place readily admits. ‘The 
 evident meaning of the words ‘‘the mount of 
 the vision of the LorD” (see v. 14); the fact 
 that the mount of the temple bore the same 
 name (2 Chr, iii. 1), the distance, two days’ 
 journey from Beer-sheba, which would just 
 suffice to bring the company to Jerusalem, 
 whereas Gerizim could not have been reached 
 from Beer-sheba on the third day, are argu- 
 ments too strong to be set aside by the single 
 difficulty mentioned above, which is in fact 
 no difficulty at all. ‘This identity is ably de- 
 fended by Hengstenberg (‘Genuineness of the 
 Pentateuch,’ II, 162, translated by Ryland), 
 Knobel (iz Joc), Kalisch (in /oc.), Kurtz (‘ Hist. 
 of Old Covenant,’ Vol.1.271), Thomson (‘’The 
 Land and the Book’, p. 475), Tristram (‘Land 
 of Israel,’ p, 152). 
 
 offer him there for a burnt offering] It can- 
 not justly be urged that the command was 
 (1) in itself immoral, or (2) that it was a 
 virtual sanction of human sacrifice. (1) As 
 to the objection that it was immoral, it may 
 be said, that the true basis of all morality is 
 obedience to the will of God; but further 
 than this, it is plain from the whole story, 
 that the command was wholly of the nature 
 of a trial, Abraham was the special type of 
 trustful, obedient, loving faith. He believed 
 that all which God commanded must be right, 
 all that He promised must be true. Hence 
 he knew that when the injunction was clear, 
 the obedience must be undoubting. The 
 wisdom, the justice, and the goodness of God, 
 were such that, though he might not under- 
 stand the reason of the dispensation, he must 
 reverently and patiently submit to it. This 
 too was not a mere blind credulity. He had 
 lived a long life under the special guiding, 
 
Vv. 3—9.] 
 
 and offer him there for a burnt offer- 
 ing upon one of the mountains which 
 I will tell thee of. 
 
 3 4 And Abraham rose up early in 
 the morning, and saddled his ass, and 
 took two of his young men with him, 
 and Isaac his son, and clave the wood 
 for the burnt offering, and rose up, 
 and went unto the place of which God 
 had told him. 
 
 4 Then on the third day Abraham 
 lifted up his eyes, and saw the place 
 afar off. 
 
 5 And Abraham said unto his young 
 men, Abide ye here with the ass; and 
 I and the lad will go yonder and wor- 
 ship, and come again to you. 
 
 GENESIS» OSX Ll. 
 
 6 And Abraham took the wood of 
 the burnt offering, and laid z¢ upon 
 Isaac his son; and he took the fire in 
 his hand, and a knife; and they went 
 both of them together. 
 
 7 And Isaac spake unto Abraham 
 his father, and said, My father: and 
 he said, ‘Here am I, my son. 
 
 offering? 
 
 8 And Abraham said, My son, God 
 will provide himself a lamb for a burnt 
 offering: so they went both of them 
 together. 
 
 g And they came to the place which 
 God had told him of; and Abraham 
 
 training, and teaching of the Lord, and so he 
 knew in whom he had believed. ‘The com- 
 mand therefore, strange as it was, was but a 
 final test of the firmness of his faith; and his 
 obedience to that command testified that the 
 faith was intelligent as well as unconditional 
 and unwavering. (2) The objection that 
 this was a virtual sanction to the heathen 
 custom of offering human sacrifices is still 
 less tenable. ‘That such sacrifices were com- 
 mon in later times is unquestionable, and pro- 
 bably they may have been already adopted by 
 the Canaanites, who certainly were afterwards 
 much addicted to them, Although we must 
 ascribe them not to Divine but to Satanic 
 influence, their observance plainly shewed the 
 devotion of the offerers to the religion of their 
 demon gods, The God of Abraham would 
 have His special servant, the father of the 
 chosen race and of the promised Seed, mani- 
 fest his faith and obedience to the true God 
 to be not less than the faith and obedience of 
 idolaters to their false gods. ‘This could not 
 be more signally done than by his readiness to 
 overcome all scruples and all natural feelings 
 at the command of Him whose voice he knew, 
 and whose leading he had so long followed. 
 But the conclusion of the history is as clear a 
 condemnation of human sacrifice as the earlier 
 part might have seemed, had it been left in- 
 complete, to sanction it. ‘The intervention of 
 the angel, the substitution of the lamb, the 
 prohibition of the human sacrifice, proved 
 that in no case could such an offering be ac- 
 ceptable to God, even as the crowning evidence 
 of faith, devotion, and self-sacrifice. The 
 following is the well-known perverted account 
 of the sacrifice of Isaac in the Phcenician 
 traditions, as preserved from Sanchoniatho by 
 Philo Byblius, ‘Cronus, whom the Phceni- 
 cians call Israel, being king over that country, 
 who after his death was deified and conse- 
 
 crated into the planet bearing his name, having 
 an only son by a nymph named Anobret, 
 called therefore Jehboud” (= Heb, Jahid), 
 ‘‘which is even now the name for only-be- 
 gotten among the Phoenicians, when great 
 perils from wars were impending over the 
 land, having clothed his son in royal appa- 
 rel offered him up upon an altar which he 
 had built,” (Euseb, ‘Prep, Evang.’ Lib. 1. 
 Carol 
 
 3. rose up early in the morning] ‘The 
 promptness and steadiness of Abraham’s obe- 
 dience are plainly marked in all the simple 
 details of this verse. 
 
 5. come again to you| It may be questioned 
 whether this had in it a prophetic significance, 
 Abraham ‘accounting that God was able to 
 raise his son up even from the dead” (Heb. xi. 
 17). In fact it was proved by the event to be 
 a prophecy, though Abraham may have ut- 
 tered it unconsciously (so Rashi): and that 
 faith in God, which never forsook the patri- 
 arch, probably in the lowest depth of his 
 anxiety brought a gleam of hope, that in some 
 unforeseen way his son, even though slain, 
 should yet be restored to him at last (see 
 Origen, ‘ Homil, viii, in Gen,’ § 5). 
 
 6. laid it upon Isaac his son] Compare 
 Joh, xix. 17, the great Antitype bearing the 
 wood for the sacrifice of Himself (Origen, 
 ‘Hom, vit. in Gen.’ § 6; Aug, ‘De C, D,’ 
 XVI. 32; *De Trin,’ iI, 6). 
 
 8, God will provide himself a lamb for a 
 burnt offering] Thelamb. ‘The fathers see 
 in this again an unconscious prophecy by 
 Abraham (see Origen as above, and Ambrose 
 ‘De Abr.’ lib.1, 8). He probably meant to say 
 that God had provided that Isaac should be 
 the lamb or victim for the burnt-offering: but 
 his words were more literally fulfilled in the 
 
 14! 
 
 And ¢ Heb. 
 he said, Behold the fire and the wood ; 7°" 
 but where zs the "lamb for a burnt ! Or, Zia. 
 
IA2 
 
 r 
 
 built an altar there, and laid the wood 
 in order, and bound Isaac his son, and 
 
 ’ James 2. ?Jaid him on the altar upon the wood. 
 
 10 And Abraham stretched forth 
 his hand, and took the knife to slay 
 his son. 
 
 11 And the angel of the Lorp 
 called unto him out of heaven, and 
 said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, 
 Here am I. 
 
 unexpected event, the ram caught in a thicket, 
 and in a deeper spiritual significance when God 
 sent His Son to be ‘‘the Lamb of God that 
 taketh away the sin of the world.” 
 
 9. Abraham built an altar there] R. 
 Eliezer in ‘ Pirke Avoth,’ c. 31, has a tradi- 
 tion that this was the same place at which 
 Adam sacrificed, at which Abel offered his 
 burnt-offering, and where Noah built an altar 
 and offered a sacrifice: so that it was appa- 
 rently supposed that Abraham merely re- 
 paired the ruins of the ancient altar. What- 
 ever the tradition is worth, it may illustrate 
 the history. An altar of earth or of loose 
 stones would be very quickly raised, 
 
 bound Isaac his son] It was common to 
 bind victims, especially human victims (Ovid, 
 ‘ Eleg. ex. Ponto,’ 111. 2; Virg. ‘ Acn, 11. 134). 
 The Jews agree that Isaac yielded submis- 
 sively to his father’s will and consented to be 
 bound and sacrificed (Joseph. ‘A. J.’ 1. 13; 
 Eliezer, ‘in Pirke,’ c. 31; so also Chrysost. 
 ‘Homil, in Gen.’ 46). Herein he was the 
 truer type of Him, ‘‘ who, when He was re- 
 viled, reviled not again; when He suffered, 
 He threatened not; but committed Himself to 
 Him that judgeth righteously” (x Pet. ii. 23), 
 
 10. stretched forth his hand| ‘The steady 
 deliberate purpose of Abraham, and yet all 
 the natural shrinking of his spirit, are admi- 
 rably expressed in the details of the history. 
 
 11. the Angel of the Lorpv| Up to this 
 verse we have only the name Elohim, God. 
 Now that the Divine intervention to save 
 Isaac and to accept a ransom for his life is 
 related, we find the name, JEHOVAH, the 
 great covenant name frequently made use of, 
 though the name Elohim occurs again in the 
 next verse. ‘The Being here called ‘‘the 
 Angel of JEHOVAH,” who speaks as with 
 Divine, supreme authority, is doubtless the 
 Angel of the Covenant (Mal, ili. 1), the ever- 
 lasting Son of the Father, who alone ‘hath 
 declared Him” (John i, 18). 
 
 12. now I know that thou fearest God] 
 ‘¢ God tried Abraham,” says ’Theodoret, ‘‘not 
 that He might learn what He knew already, 
 but that He might shew to others, with how 
 great justice He loved the patriarch” (‘ Qu, 
 
 GENE ois: 
 
 0d 5 
 12 And he said, Lay not thine hand 
 
 upon the lad, neither do thou any thing 
 unto him: for now I know that thou 
 fearest God, seeing thou hast not with- 
 held thy son, thine only som from 
 me. 
 13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes, 
 and looked, and behold behind Aim a 
 ram caught in a thicket by his horns: 
 and Abraham went and took the ram, 
 
 [v. 10-13. 
 
 a 
 
 in Gen,’ Lxx1I1). Compare Origen (‘ Homil. 
 vill. 8), who refers to those words of the 
 Apostle: ‘‘ God spared not His own Son, but 
 freely gave Him up for us all.” 
 
 thou hast not withheld thy son| ‘These words 
 in the LXX. (ovn éeheiow rod viod cov) ap- 
 pear to be referred to in Rom. viii. 32 (rod 
 idiov viod ov édeicato). Whence we may 
 learn that St Paul held the sacrifice of Isaac 
 to be prophetic of Christ, 
 
 13. behold behind him a ram caught in 
 a thicket by his horns} ‘There is a various 
 reading (supported by many MSS., by the Sa- 
 maritan Pentateuch, LXX., Vulg., Syr., Sam., 
 and perhaps Onkelos), which might be ren- 
 dered thus: ‘‘ Behold a single ram caught,” 
 &c, a ram, that is, separated from the flock, 
 There is a similar expression in Dan, Vill. 3: 
 ‘‘ Behold, there stood before the river a ram,” 
 lit. ‘one ram,” or a ‘‘single ram,” ‘The sepa- 
 ration of the ram thus caught is significant, 
 both historically, as shewing the Providential 
 agency of God, and also as pointing to that 
 Lamb of God, who was ‘separate from sin- 
 ners” (Heb, vii, 26), bearing alone the burden 
 of our iniquities, St Augustine thinks the 
 horns caught in the thicket typical of the 
 Lord Jesus crowned with thorns before His 
 sacrifice (‘ De C. D.’ XVI. 32). 
 
 offered him up for a burnt offering in tke 
 stead of his son| It has been argued that the 
 Jamb substituted for Isaac, not Isaac himself, 
 was the true type of the Lord Jesus, who 
 died that we might live. This, however, 
 would be a very imperfect explication of the 
 mystery. ‘The antitype is always greater than 
 the type, and hence in the prophetic system 
 of the Old Testament, types are multiplied 
 that they may express collectively that which 
 can but partially be expressed by one of them. 
 The fathers recognize the double type in this 
 whole history. The father with full delibe- 
 rate purpose offering up his dearly beloved, 
 only-begotten son, the son willingly obedient 
 unto death, the wood for the sacrifice carried 
 by the victim up the hill, the sacrifice ful- 
 filled in purpose though not in act, and then 
 the father receiving his son in a figure from 
 the dead (Heb. xi. 19) after three days of 
 death in the father’s purpose and belief; all 
 
Vv. 14++16. | 
 
 and offered him:-up for a burnt offer- 
 ing in the stead of his son. 
 
 - 14 And Abraham called the name 
 of that place 'Jehovah-jireh: as it is 
 said to this day, In the mount of the 
 Lorp it shall be seen. 
 
 AINE Sad Sexe x Til: 
 
 15 “ And the angel of the Lorp 
 called unto Abraham out of heaven 
 the second time, 
 
 16 And said, “By myself have I 
 
 9. 
 E 
 
 sworn, saith the Lorp, for because 2:- 
 2 ; Luke 1. 73. 
 Heb, 6. 13, 
 
 thou hast done this thing, and hast 
 
 this is as much an actual prophecy of the 
 sacrifice and resurrection of the Son of God 
 as was possible without a true slaying of 
 Isaac, for which was substituted the slaying 
 of the ram, That which Isaac’s sacrifice 
 wanted to make it perfect as a type was 
 actual death and the notion of substitution. 
 These therefore were supplied by the death of 
 the ram, and his substitution for a human 
 life. Theodoret says (‘Qu. in Gen,’ LxxII.) 
 that ‘‘Isaac was the type of the Godhead, the 
 ram of the manhood,” ‘This perhaps sounds 
 fanciful at first; but the correspondence is in 
 truth very exact. Isaac was of too noble a 
 nature to be slain upon the altar; God would 
 have abhorred such an offering, Hence the 
 Most High prepares a victim to be as it were 
 joined with Isaac and then to suffer, that 
 thus the sacrifice should not be imperfect, 
 So the ever blessed Son of God was by nature 
 above the possibility of suffering; hence the 
 Eternal Father prepares for Him a perfect 
 humanity (‘‘a Body hast Thou prepared 
 me”), that He might die in that nature which 
 was mortal, the immortal, impassible nature 
 being yet inseparably united with it. Thus, 
 Isaac and the ram together symbolized and 
 typified in almost all particulars the sacrifice, 
 the death and the resurrection of the Son of 
 God, who also was the Son of man. 
 
 We may observe too, that not only was 
 Isaac thus made the most memorable type of 
 the Redeemer of the world (Isaac, who other= 
 wise seems less noticeable than either Abra- 
 ham or Jacob), but also that Abraham had the 
 singular honour of representing the highest, 
 holiest God and Father, who ‘“‘ spared not His 
 own Son, but freely gave Him up for us all” 
 (Rom, viii. 32. See Aug. ‘De Civ, D,’ xvi, 
 32). 
 
 14, Jenovau-jireh| i.e. ‘the Lord will 
 see,” or ‘‘ the Lord will provide.” ‘The same 
 words which Abraham had used in v, 8, 
 but with a change in the sacred names, In 
 v. 8, when Isaac had asked, ‘‘ where is the 
 Lamb?” Abraham answered, Elohim jireh, 
 *¢ God will see,” or ‘‘ provide a lamb for Him- 
 self.” Now he perceives that le had uttered 
 an unconscious prophecy, and that the God 
 (Elohim) in whom he trusted had shewn 
 ‘Himself indeed JEHOVAH, the Eternal Truth 
 and the covenated Saviour of his servants, and 
 so he names the place JEHOVAH-jireh. The 
 -connection which there is between these words 
 and the word Moriah (see on vy, 2) has sug- 
 
 gested the belief, that the name Moriah in v, 
 2 is used proleptically, and that it really ori- 
 ginated in this saying of Abraham, 
 
 as it is said to this day, In the mount of the 
 Lorp it shall be seen| Or, ‘‘it shall be pro- 
 vided.” 
 
 There is great variety of renderings in the 
 ancient Versions, Indeed, if we disregard the 
 vowel points, it would be equally possible to 
 translate ‘‘In the mount of the Lord it shall 
 be seen or provided,” or ‘‘ In the mount the 
 Lord will see or provide,” or ‘‘ In the mount 
 the Lord will be seen.” ‘The LXX, takes the 
 last, the Vulgate, Syriac and Samaritan take 
 the second, Onkelos departs from his habit 
 of translating, and paraphrases, like the late 
 Targums; ‘‘ And Abraham worshipped and 
 prayed there and said before the Lord, Here 
 shall generations worship; whereupon it shall 
 
 ‘be said in that day, In this mountain Abra- 
 
 ham worshipped before the Lord.” St Jerome, 
 taking the Latin, explained it thus: ‘‘ This be- 
 came a proverb among the Hebrews, that if 
 any should be in trouble and should desire 
 the help of the Lord, they should say, In the 
 mount the Lord will see, that is, as He had 
 mercy on Abraham, so will He have mercy 
 on us” (‘ Qu. Hebraic, in Gen,’ XxI1). 
 
 On the whole, the pointing of the Maso- 
 rites, a tradition never lightly to be rejected, 
 which is followed by the Authorised Version, 
 seems to give the most probable sense of the 
 passage (So Ges, ‘hes,’ p, 1246; Rosemn., 
 Knobel), But, in any case, there seems not 
 only a general assurance of God’s providential 
 care of His people, who in trouble may re- 
 member. that ‘‘the Lord will provide,” but 
 also a special prophecy, 1st of the manifesta- 
 tion of the Lord in His temple at Jerusalem, 
 where He was to be seen in the Shechinah or 
 cloud of glory between the Cherubim, where 
 He provided access to Himself and sacrifices 
 for His service; 2ndly, of the coming of the 
 
 Lord to His temple (Mal. iii. 1), thereby 
 
 making ‘‘ the glory of the latter house greater 
 than of the former” (Hagg. ii. 9); and of His 
 providing there a Lamb for a sacrifice, which 
 should save not only from temporal but from 
 eternal death, taking away the sin of the 
 world, 
 
 16. by myself have I sworn] This is 
 the final promise of the Lord to Abraham, 
 
 confirming all the former promises by the 
 
 solemnity of an oath, and ‘‘because He could 
 
 _swear by no greater, He sware by Himself” 
 
 143 
 
 ¢ Ps, 105. 
 
 cclus. 44. 
 
144 GENESISu Xx [v. 17—24, 
 
 not withheld thy son, thine only 
 
 son: 
 
 17 That in blessing I will bless 
 thee, and in multiplying I will mul- 
 tiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, 
 and as the sand which zs upon the sea 
 
 tHeb. 4. ‘shore; and thy seed shall possess the 
 gate of his enemies; 
 
 @chap.r2, 18 “And in thy seed shall all the 
 
 &18.18. Nations of the earth be blessed; be- 
 
 Ecclus. 44 cause thou hast obeyed my voice, 
 
 Acts 3.25. Ig So Abraham returned unto his 
 
 30 Os 
 
 young men, and they rose up and went 
 together to Beer-sheba; and Abraham 
 dwelt at Beer-sheba. 
 
 20 { And it came to pass after 
 these things, that it was told Abra- 
 
 ham, saying, Behold, Milcah, she hath | 
 
 also born children unto thy brother 
 Nahor ; 
 
 21 Huz his first-born, and Buz his 
 brother, and Kemuel the father of 
 Aram, 
 
 22 And Chesed, and Hazo, and 
 Pildash, and Jidlaph, and Bethuel. 
 
 23 And Bethuel begat ¢ Rebekah: «Called, 
 these eight Milcah did bear to Nahor, zz. 
 
 becca. 
 
 Abraham’s brother. 
 24 And his concubine, whose name 
 was Reumah, she bare also Tebah, 
 
 (Heb, vi, 13). The vast importance of the 
 revelation and of the promise here recorded is 
 proved by this remarkable act of the Most 
 High, ‘‘God, willing more abundantly to 
 shew unto the heirs of promise the immuta- 
 bility of His counsel, interposed Himself by 
 an oath” (or ‘‘made Himself the Mediator to 
 be sworn by,” euecirevoev dpxw); ‘that by 
 two immutable things” (7. e, His word and His 
 oath, Chrysost., ‘Theod., Theophyl.), ‘in 
 which it was impossible for God to lie, we 
 might have a strong consolation, who have 
 fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set 
 before us” (Heb, vi. 17, 18). Abraham had 
 by Divine grace achieved a victory of faith 
 unheard of before in the world’s history; and 
 so to him personally a most blessed and most 
 solemn promise is given of prosperity, honour 
 and enlargement to him and to his seed after 
 him, But this great victory of Abraham’s 
 was the type of a still greater victory to be 
 won hereafter by God and God’s only begot- 
 ten Son; and so the promise to Abraham in- 
 cludes a promise still greater to all mankind, 
 for in the seed of Abraham all the nations of 
 the earth were to be blessed for ever. N.B. 
 Onkelos renders here, ‘‘ I have sworn by My 
 Word,” Memra; and the Arabic, ‘I have 
 sworn by My own Name.” 
 
 20. it was told Abraham] ‘This is in- 
 troduced for the sake of tracing the genealogy 
 of Abraham’s brother Nahor down to Re- 
 bekah the wife of Isaac, v. 23. 
 
 21, Huz] See on ch, x. 23, where we 
 have seen Uz and Aram together before, It 
 is only natural that names should have been 
 repeated in the same race, the race of Shem, Uz 
 and Aram also occur among the posterity of 
 Esau (Gen, xxxvi. 28), whence Idumea is 
 called ‘the land of Uz” (Lam, iv. 21), ‘This 
 recurrence of names in juxtaposition creates 
 some obscurity as to the sites to be assigned 
 to their descendants in the division of the 
 
 nations, St Jerome (‘ Qu. in Gen.,’) thinks 
 that Job was a descendant of Huz or Uz the 
 son of Nahor, It is said that Job was of the 
 land of Uz (jobi, 1), and his friend Elihu 
 was ‘“‘a Buzite of the kindred of Ram” (xxxii, 
 2). If Ram be the same as Aram, we have 
 then the three names in this verse—Huz, Buz 
 and Aram occurring in the history of Job, 
 In Jerem, xxv. 23 Buz is placed with Dedan 
 and ‘Tema, apparently in Arabia Petrza, 
 
 22. Chesed] Jerome supposes the Chas- 
 dim (or Chaldzans) to have derived their 
 name from him, to which conjecture the oc- 
 currence of the Chasdim also in the Book of 
 Job, gives some colour (see on v, 21). If, 
 indeed, ‘‘ Ur of the Chaldees” was so called 
 when Abraham dwelt there Sig 1, 3595 
 this would be an anachronism, but very pro- 
 bably it may have been known as Ur of the 
 Chaldees when Moses wrote, and so desig- 
 nated by him, though the Chaldees or Chas- 
 dim may not have been in existence in the 
 days of Abraham, 
 
 23. Bethuel begat Rebekah| ‘The rela- 
 tionship therefore of Rebekah to Isaac was 
 that Rebekah was daughter of Isaac’s first 
 cousin, ‘They were, as we should say, first 
 cousins once removed, Nahor was the elder 
 brother of Abraham, and his granddaughter 
 may have been of a suitable age to be the 
 wife of Abraham’s son, 
 
 these eight} ‘The sons of Nahor, like the 
 sons of Ishmael and of Jacob, were twelve in 
 number, But though it happens that among 
 the descendants of ‘Terah three persons had 
 twelve sons, there is such a diversity in the 
 other circumstances of the family, such a 
 difference with regard to their mothers, and 
 there are so many other patriarchs, Abraham, 
 Isaac, &c,, the numbering of whose children 
 were quite unlike these, that the notion of a 
 mystic number is utterly untenable (see Keil 
 in loc,), 
 
 ar 
 z 
 
 OA emnll ele . 
 
 mM. 9. 10 
 
and Gaham, and Thahash, and Maa- 
 chah. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 1 The age and death of Sarah. 3 The pur- 
 chase of Machpelah, 19 where Sarah was 
 buried. 
 
 ND Sarah was an hundred and 
 seven and twenty years old: 
 these were the years of the life of Sarah. 
 2 And Sarah died.in Kirjath-arba ; 
 the same is Hebron in the land 
 of Canaan: and Abraham came to 
 mourn for Sarah, and to weep for 
 her. 
 3 { And Abraham stood up from 
 
 Cuap, XXIII. 1. And Sarah was an hun- 
 dred and seven and twenty years old| Sarah 
 is the only woman whose age is mention- 
 ed in the Scriptures (Lightfoot, ‘Har, of 
 Old Testament,’ Gen. xxili,), because as the 
 mother of the promised seed, she became the 
 mother of all believers, (x Pet. ili. 6) (Del., 
 Keil.) She died 37 years after the birth of 
 {saac, as she was 90 when he was born, 
 
 2. Kirjath-arba; the same is Hebron in the 
 land of Canaan] See on ch, xiii, 18, ‘The suppo- 
 sition that the name Hebron was not given till 
 the time of Joshua, and that the use of it in 
 Genesis indicates a later hand, is contradicted 
 by the natural force of these words, ‘They 
 appear plainly to have been written by some 
 one not then living in the land of Canaan, 
 Hebron was apparently the original name, 
 which was changed to Kirjath-arba, and re- 
 stored again by Caleb, Josh, xiv, 15. 
 
 Abraham came to mourn for Sarah] Aben- 
 ezra and others infer from this that Abraham 
 was not with Sarah when she died. It may 
 mean no more than that Abraham went into 
 Sarah’s tent to mourn for her, 
 
 4. I am a stranger and a sojourner] 
 (Cp. Heb, xi. 13), Abraham had only pas- 
 tured his flocks, moving from place to place, 
 as a nomad chief; but the various Canaanitish 
 tribes had settled in the land, building cities 
 and cultivating fields; and so as Lightfoot 
 observes (‘Harm,:’ on Gen, xxiil.), ‘¢ a burial 
 place is the first land that Abraham has in 
 Canaan,” ‘The heir of the promises was but 
 a stranger and a pilgrim, never to rest but in 
 the grave, but with a glorious future before 
 him for his race and for himself; assured that 
 his seed should possess the land, and himself 
 ‘desiring a better country, that is a heavenly,” 
 
 Give me a possession of a buryingplace with 
 you| ‘This is the first mention of burial, It 
 was noted by the heathen historian as a cha- 
 racteristic of the Jews, that they preferred to 
 
 Vor, I, 
 
 GENESIS. 2X TT OCA ITT. 
 
 before his dead, and spake unto the 
 sons of Heth, saying, 
 
 4 I ama stranger and a sojourner 
 with you: give me a possession of a 
 buryingplace with you, that I may 
 bury my dead out of my sight. 
 
 5 And the children of Heth an- 
 swered Abraham, saying unto him, 
 
 6 Hear us, my lord: thou art a 
 
 mighty prince among us: in the choice + Heb. 
 of our sepulchres bury thy dead; none €27°°° ¥ 
 
 of us shall withhold from thee his 
 sepulchre, but that thou mayest bury 
 thy dead. | 
 
 7 And Abraham stood up, and 
 
 bury their dead rather than to burn them; 
 corpora condere quam cremare (Tac, ‘Hist.’ 
 v. 5). It is observable that this is thus men- 
 tioned first, when the first death takes place 
 in the family of him, who had received the 
 promises, ‘The care of the bodies of the de- 
 parted is a custom apparently connected with 
 the belief in their sanctity as vessels of the 
 Grace of God, and with the hope that they 
 may be raised again in the day of the restitu- 
 tion of all things, ‘The elaborate embalming 
 of the Egyptians had perhaps a very different 
 significance, looking rather to retain the be- 
 loved body in its former shape, and perhaps 
 to preserve the living principle in permanent 
 existence with it, rather than hoping that the 
 body, being ‘‘sown a natural should be raised 
 a spiritual body.” 
 
 5. saying unto him| ‘The Sam, Pent. and 
 LX X. read (by the variation of a single letter), 
 ‘‘saying, Not so,” 
 
 6. thou art a mighty prince among us| lit. ‘a 
 prince of God.” See on ch. x. 9, the name 
 of God being apparently added to give a su- 
 perlative force: cp, 1 Sam, xxvi, 12, where 
 R. D. Kimchi writes, ‘‘ When the Scripture 
 would magnify anything, it joins it to the 
 name of God,” 
 
 in the choice of our sepulchres bury thy dead| 
 The Hittites in the complimentary manner 
 common in oriental bargains (see ‘Thomson, 
 ‘Land and Book,’ p. 578) offer Abraham to 
 bury his dead in their sepulchres; but there 
 was a separation between them of faith and 
 life, which forbade Abraham to deposit the 
 body of Sarah in the same grave with the 
 people of the land, We know nothing of the 
 funeral rites of the Canaanites at this early 
 period, nor whether they buried the bodies 
 of the departed or only their ashes, It 1s, 
 however, very probable, that there were ido- 
 latrous rites connected with their sepulture, 
 which it would have been unlawful for Abra- 
 ham to countenance, 
 
 K 
 
 145 
 
t Heb, 
 Sull 
 
 money. 
 
 +t Heb. 
 ears. 
 
 bowed himself to the people of the 
 land, even to the children of Heth. 
 
 8 And he communed with them, 
 saying, If it be your mind that I 
 should bury my dead out of my sight; 
 hear me, and intreat for me to Ephron 
 the son of Zohar, 
 
 g That he may give me the cave 
 of Machpelah, which he hath, which 
 is in the end of his field; for tas 
 much money as it is worth he shall 
 give it me for a possession of a bury- 
 ingplace amongst you. 
 
 10 And Ephron dwelt among the 
 children of Heth: and Ephron the 
 Hittite answered Abraham in the tau- 
 dience of the children of Heth, even 
 of all that went in at the gate of his 
 city, saying, 
 
 7. bowed himself| The Vulgate has 
 ‘* adoravit coram populo,” It was simply the 
 deep reverence common in the East (cp. 1 
 Sam, Xxv, 24; xxviii, 14; 1 Kings xviii, 7; 
 2 Kings ii, 15; Esth. viii. 3). It wasa matter 
 of courtesy and respect, also of entreaty or of 
 gratitude, 
 
 9. the cave of Machpelah| ‘The soil of 
 Palestine being rocky naturally suggested 
 sepulture in caves (see Winer, ‘Realw.’ s.v. 
 Grabes, Smith, ‘Dict. of Bible,’ s.v. Buria/). 
 All the ancient Versions render the words 
 “‘cave of Machpelah” by ‘“‘the double cave,” 
 deriving Machpelah from the verb Caphal to 
 divide, to double, Interpreters have explained 
 this in various ways, as either that there were 
 two entrances to the cave, or that it had a 
 double structure such that two bodies (as 
 e.g. that of Abraham and Sarah) might be 
 laid there (see Heidegger, 11. 131). Others, 
 however, treat the word as a proper name, 
 and Gesenius considers it more probably to 
 signify ‘‘ portion” than ‘‘duplication,” ‘Thesite 
 of this ancient burialplace is well ascertained. 
 Josephus tells us that ‘‘ Abraham and his de- 
 scendants built monuments over thesepulchres” 
 here (A. J. I. 14), which were said to be 
 still visible in the days of Jerome (‘ Onomast.’). 
 Now a mosque is erected over the ground 
 believed to cover the sepulchres, ‘The Haram 
 or sacred precinct of the mosque is surrounded 
 by a wall, believed to be as ancient as any- 
 thing now remaining in Palestine. The pre- 
 sent condition and appearance of it are de- 
 scribed by Robinson (‘B. R.’ 11. p. 431 sq.), 
 see also'Thomson, ‘ Land and Book,’ p. 580, and 
 a full account of the sepulchre in the appendix 
 to Stanley’s ‘Sermons in the East,’ 
 
 GENESIS: 2x 
 
 [v. S—15. 
 
 11 Nay, my lord, hear me: the 
 field give I thee, and the cave that 
 is therein, I give it thee; in the pre- 
 sence of the sons of my people give I 
 it thee: bury thy dead. 
 
 12 And Abraham bowed down him- 
 self before the people of the land. 
 
 13 And he spake unto Ephron in 
 the audience of the people of the land, 
 saying, But if thou wilt give it, I pray 
 thee, hear me: I will give thee money 
 for the field; take it of me, and I 
 will bury my dead there. 
 
 14 And Ephron answered Abra- 
 ham, saying unto him, 
 
 15 My lord, hearken unto me: the 
 land is worth four hundred shekels 
 of silver; what zs that betwixt me 
 and thee? bury therefore thy dead. 
 
 for as much money as it is worth] lit. ‘for 
 full money.” ‘The same words are rendered 
 1 Chron, xxi, 22, ‘‘for the full price.” 
 
 10. all that went in at the gate of his 
 city| ‘The transaction took place publicly at 
 the gate of the city, the forum or public place 
 of the ancient cities of the East, see on 
 Chy SIZA1, 
 
 ll. the field give I thee] Compare 2 Sam, 
 xxiv. 20, 24. Both conversations, that be- 
 tween Abraham and Ephron, and that be- 
 tween David and Araunah, are specimens of 
 the extreme courtesy of the Eastern people in 
 the transaction of business, 
 
 13. But if thou wilt give it, I pray thee, 
 hear me| Rather perhaps, ‘‘But do thou, 
 I pray thee, hear me.” ‘Two particles of 
 wishing or intreating are used, 
 
 money for the field| Lit. ‘‘the money of the 
 field,” i.e, the value of the field, 
 
 15. four hundred shekels of silver] ‘The 
 word shekel means merely weight, cp. pondus, 
 pound, See on ch, xx, 16, where no name for 
 a coin or weight occurs, but only the words ‘‘a 
 thousand of silver.” Here we first have the 
 name of a weight, though probably not of 
 acoin, ‘There is no mention of coinage in 
 Scripture before the Babylonish Captivity ; 
 but the Egyptians had rings of gold and silver 
 of fixed weight long before Moses, which 
 are represented on the monuments, ‘The first 
 actual Jewish money appears to have been 
 coined by Simon Maccabzeus (1 Macc, xv.). 
 It is not easy to conjecture accurately what 
 the value of a shekel may have been in the 
 time of Abraham, In later times the LXX. 
 and the New Testament (Matt. xvii. 24) 
 
v. 16—3.] CEE INSEL, Sahl lt, Oe LV. 147 
 
 16 And Abraham hearkened unto 
 Ephron; and Abraham weighed to 
 Ephron the silver, which he had 
 named in the audience of the sons of 
 Heth, four hundred shekels of silver, 
 Current money with the merchant. 
 
 17 4 And the field of Ephron, 
 which was in Machpelah, which was 
 before Mamre, the field, and the cave 
 which was therein, and all the trees 
 that were in the field, that were in all 
 the borders round about, were made 
 sure 
 
 18 Unto Abraham for a possession 
 in the presence of the children of 
 Heth, before all that went in at the 
 gate of his city. 
 
 1g And after this, Abraham buried 
 Sarah his wife in the cave of the field 
 of Machpelah before Mamre: the 
 same is Hebron in the land of Ca- 
 naan. 
 
 20 And the field, and the cave that 
 7s therein, were made sure unto Abra- 
 
 identify the half shekel with the didrachma, 
 which would make the shekel nearly half an 
 ounce, 220 grains of our weight, or a little 
 less in value than half-a-crown of our present 
 money. ‘The field therefore would have been 
 purchased for about fifty guineas, 52/. ros. 
 (See Gesenius, ‘Thes,’ p. 1474; Winer, ‘R. 
 W. B.’ s.v. sekel; Smith’s ‘Dict. of Bib.’ s,vv. 
 money, shekel, weights and measures.) 
 
 16. current money with the merchant] 
 Lit. “silver passing with the merchant.” The 
 Canaanites were great merchants, so much 
 so that the very word Canaanite became a 
 synonym for merchant, see Job xl. 30 (in 
 Authorised Version xli. 6); Prov, xxxi. 24. 
 It is therefore very probable that they early 
 learned the use of silver as a means of barter: 
 and though it may not have been coined, yet 
 the masses or bars of silver may have been 
 early formed into conventional shapes, or 
 marked with some rude sign to indicate their 
 weight (see Ges, ‘‘Thes,’ p, 982). 
 
 17. the field, &c.] Not only the cave, 
 as first proposed by Abraham, but the whcle 
 field with trees in it, which may have formed 
 part of that grove of Mamre, where Abraham 
 dwelt before the overthrow of Sodom and 
 where he built an altar to the Lord, 
 
 qere made sure unto Abraham] Lit. ‘‘stood 
 firm to Abraham.” 
 
 Cnap, XXIV.1. Abraham was old| He 
 
 ham for a possession of a buryingplace 
 by the sons of Heth. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 1 Abraham sweareth his servant. 10 The 
 servant's journey: 12 his prayer: 14 his sign. 
 15 Rebekah meeteth him, 18 fulfilleth his sien, 
 22 receiveth jewels, 23 sheweth her kindred, 
 25 and inviteth him home. 26 The servant 
 blesseth God. 29 Laban entertaineth him. 
 34 Lhe servant sheweth his message. 50 
 Laban and Bethuel approve it. 58 Rebekah 
 consenteth to go. 62 Lsaac meeteth her. 
 
 ND Abraham was old, and "well t Heb. 
 gone into 
 
 stricken in age: and the Lorp Zays. 
 
 had blessed Abraham in all things. 
 
 2, And Abraham said unto his eld- 
 est servant of his house, that ruled 
 over all that he had, “Put, I pray «chap. 47. 
 thee, thy hand under my thigh: re 
 
 3 And I will make thee swear by 
 the Lorp, the God of heaven, and 
 the God of the earth, that thou shalt 
 not take a wife unto my son of the 
 daughters of the Canaanites, among 
 whom I dwell: 
 
 was 137 at the death of Sarah. Isaac was 
 then 37; and when he married Rebekah, he 
 was 40 (see ch, xxv, 20), Abraham therefore 
 must have been in his r4oth year at this time, 
 and he lived 35 years after it (ch, xxv. 7). 
 
 2. unto his eldest servant of his house| Lit. 
 ‘¢to his servant, the elder of his house.” ‘The 
 word e/der in Hebrew as in most languages is 
 used as a title of honour, cp. Sheykh, Senatus, 
 yépovres, presbyter, Signor, Mayor, &c, (Ges, 
 ‘Thes,’ p. 427; Hammond, on Acts xi. 30). 
 It is generally supposed that this was Eliezer 
 of Damascus, see ch, xv. 2. 
 
 Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh] A 
 form of adjuration mentioned only here and 
 of Jacob, ch. xlvii. 29. Various conjectures 
 have been made by Jews (Joseph. ‘ Ant.’ 1. 16; 
 Hieron. ‘Qu. in Gen.;’ Ambrose, ‘De Abra- 
 ham,’ 1, 6; Eliezer, in ‘Pirke,’ c. 39), and by 
 the fathers (Ambros, ‘De Abrahamo, I. 9 ; 
 Hieron, ubi supra; August. ‘De C. D.’ 
 XVI. 33); but nothing is known with certainty 
 of the signification of the action, Aben-Ezra 
 supposes that it was a form of oath prevalent 
 in patriarchal times but only taken by inferiors, 
 as here by Abraham’s steward, and in Gen, xlvil, 
 29 by ason to his father; that accordingly it 
 was a kind of homage, the servant or son there- 
 by indicating subjection and the purpose of 
 obedience. (See Heidegger, I. pp. 134, 1353 
 Rosenm. in loc.) 
 
 3. of the daughters of the Canaanites} 
 
 K 2 
 
148 
 
 é chap. 12. 
 
 4 But thou shalt go unto my coun- 
 try, and to my kindred, and take a 
 wife unto my son Isaac. 
 
 5 And the servant said unto him, 
 Peradventure the woman will not 
 be willing to follow me unto this 
 land: must I needs bring thy son 
 again unto the land from whence 
 thou camest? 
 
 6 And Abraham said unto him, 
 Beware thou that thou bring not my 
 son thither again. 
 
 7 4 The Lorp God of heaven, 
 which took me from my father’s house, 
 and from the land of my kindred, and 
 which spake unto me, and that sware 
 
 7, &13.15. unto me, saying, ?Unto thy seed will 
 
 15.16. 
 & 26. 4. 
 
 I give this land; he shall send his 
 
 The licentiousness of the Canaanites had pro- 
 bably determined Abraham against marrying 
 his son to one of their daughters, He had 
 also, no doubt, reference to the Promised 
 Seed, and desired that the race from which 
 He was to come should be kept pure from 
 admixture with the race of Ham. 
 
 6. Beware thou that thou bring not my son 
 thither again} Abraham had been distinctly 
 called of God to leave his own country, and 
 tobe a stranger and sojourner in the land which 
 was to be his hereafter, It would therefore 
 have been an act both of unbelief and of 
 disobedience, to send his son back again, He 
 trusted that He, who had so called him, 
 would provide his son with a wife from his 
 own kindred, not defiled, at least as the 
 Canaanites were, with heathen worship and 
 heathen morality; but in any case he would 
 rather his son should wed among the aliens 
 than return to the place whence he himself 
 had been bidden to depart. 
 
 10. ten camels, &c.] ‘The journey was 
 long and could only be performed in safety 
 by a considerable company or caravan. The 
 words which follow, ‘‘for all the goods of his 
 master were in his hand,” very probably are 
 no more than an explanation of his taking so 
 many camels with him, his master sparing 
 nothing to make the journey successful, ‘The 
 LXX. and Vulgate render ‘‘and he took part 
 of all his master’s goods in his hand,” as though 
 Abraham had sent a present with the servant 
 to conciliate the favour of the bride’s family, 
 
 to Mesopotamia| Lit. ‘‘ Aram of the two 
 rivers,” or ‘‘Aram-Naharaim.” ‘The name 
 Nabarina constantly occurs in Egyptian in- 
 scriptions of the 18th and 19th dynasties, In 
 
 GEN ESTs) oars 
 
 [v. 4-—11. 
 
 angel before thee, and thou shalt take 
 a wife unto my son from thence. 
 
 8 And if the woman will not be 
 willing to follow thee, then thou shalt 
 be clear from this my oath: only bring 
 not my son thither again. 
 
 g And the servant put his hand 
 under the thigh of Abraham his master, 
 and sware to him concerning that 
 matter. 
 
 10 @ And the servant took ten 
 camels of the camels of his master, and 
 
 departed ; "for all the goods of his !0r, anc 
 
 master were in his hand: and he arose, 
 and went to Mesopotamia, unto the 
 city of Nahor. 
 
 11 And he made his camels to kneel 
 down without the city by a well of 
 
 other passages in Genesis (xxv. 20; xxviii. 2, 
 6, 7}; XXX, 18; XXxlii, 18; xxxv, 9, 263 xlvi. 15) 
 we read of Padan Aram or simply Padan 
 (Gen, xlviii. 7), ‘the Plain of Syria,” ‘the 
 flat land of Syria.” 4ram-Naharaim occurs 
 again Deut. xxiii, 5; Judg. iii, 8; Ps, lx. 2 
 (Heb.). Both names describe the low flat 
 country lying between the two rivers Tigris 
 and Euphrates, though Padan Aram was 
 more limited in extent than Aram-Naharaim. 
 The whole highland country of Syria appears 
 to have been called Aram, as many think to 
 distinguish it from Canaan, the low country, 
 Aram meaning ‘‘high” and Canaan ‘low” 
 land, ‘The country, however, which lies be- 
 tween the two rivers, is chiefly a vast plain, 
 though intersected by the Sinjar range, and 
 becoming more mountainous towards the 
 North (see Stanley, ‘S, and P.’ p, 129; Smith’s 
 ‘Dict. of Bible,’ 1. p. 338). Aram-Na- 
 haraim was the whole region afterwards called 
 Mesopotamia, lying between the two rivers: 
 Padan Aram being a limited portion of this 
 country of flat character in the neighbour- 
 hood of Haran (see on xxv. 20, xxvii, 43). 
 
 the city of Nahor] i.e, Haran or Charran 
 (compare ch, xxvii, 43, and see ch, xi, 31; 
 Acts vii, 2). 
 
 11. made his camels to kneel down] ‘That 
 they might be unloaded, and rest there, (See 
 on the whole of this scene, ‘Thomson, ‘Land 
 and Book,’ p, 592.) 
 
 the time that women go out to draw water | 
 Le Clerc compares Hom, Od. vil. 20, where 
 Minerva, in the form of a girl carrying a 
 pitcher, meets Ulysses as he is about to enter 
 the city of the Phcenicians in the evening, 
 See also Robinson, ‘B. R.’ vol, 11. p. 368, where 
 a somewhat similar scene to this is described, 
 
| Heb. 
 that wo- 
 
 Vv. 12—22.] 
 
 water at the time of the evening, even 
 the time tthat women go out to draw 
 
 men which Water. 
 
 draw 
 water go 
 forth. 
 
 ¢ Ver. 43. 
 
 t Heb. 
 good of 
 counte- 
 nance. 
 
 12 And he said, O Lorp God of 
 my master Abraham, I pray thee, 
 send me good speed this day, and shew 
 kindness unto my master Abraham. 
 
 13 Behold, “I stand bere by the 
 well of water; and the daughters of 
 the men of the city come out to draw 
 water: 
 
 14 And let it come to pass, that 
 the damsel to whom I shall say, Let 
 down thy pitcher, I pray thee, that I 
 may drink; and she shall say, Drink, 
 and I will give thy camels drink also: 
 let the same be she that thou hast 
 appointed for thy servant Isaac; and 
 thereby shall I know that thou hast 
 shewed kindness unto my master. 
 
 15 4 And it came to pass, before 
 he had done speaking, that, behold, 
 Rebekah came out, who was born to 
 Bethuel, son of Milcah, the wife of 
 Nahor, Abraham’s brother, with her 
 pitcher upon her shoulder. 
 
 16 And the damsel was 'very fair 
 
 ENE OPS Aleve 
 
 to look upon, a virgin, neither had 
 any man known her: and she went 
 down to the well, and filled her pitcher, 
 and came up. 
 
 17 And the servant ran to meet 
 her, and said, Let me, I pray thee, 
 drink a little water of thy pitcher. 
 
 18 And she said, Drink, my lord: 
 and she hasted, and let down her 
 pitcher upon her hand, and gave him 
 drink. 
 
 1g And when she had done giving 
 him drink, she said, I will draw water 
 for thy camels also, until they have 
 done drinking. 
 
 20 And she hasted, and emptied 
 her pitcher into the trough, and ran 
 again unto the well to draw water, 
 and drew for all his camels. 
 
 21 And the man wondering at her 
 held his peace, to wit whether the 
 Lorp had made his journey prosperous 
 or not. 
 
 22 And it came to pass, as the 
 camels had done drinking, that the 
 
 man took a golden "earring of half a jewel for 
 aig ihe 
 7€ad,. 
 
 shekel weight, and two bracelets for 
 
 nn ee aEt EE EEE EES EEE SSSI anSSnSnSI Sn 
 
 12. O Lorv God of my master Abra- 
 hbam| ‘The Damascene recognizes JEHOVAH, 
 the God of his master Abraham, the Supreme 
 Disposer of all things. He had probably 
 been born a heathen idolater; but Abraham, 
 to whom God had been revealed as JEHO- 
 vAn, the eternal self-existing, had no doubt 
 taught his household to acknowledge Him as 
 the Covenant God of Abraham and his family. 
 It is very observable, however, that when 
 Abraham administers an oath to his servant, 
 he makes him swear not only by JEHOVAH, 
 but adds the God of heaven and the God of 
 the earth, which might be a stronger sanction 
 to one brought up in ignorance of the faith of 
 his master, . 
 
 give me good speed| Lit. ‘‘ cause to meet 
 me,” i.e, the person of whom I am in quest. 
 
 14, the damsel] ‘The word here used 
 for damsel is of common gender, signifying 
 a child or young person of either sex, ‘This 
 is a peculiarity of the Pentateuch, In all the 
 later books the distinction of gender is ob- 
 served, the feminine affix (1) being used when 
 a girl is intended, It is important to notice 
 this here; first as shewing the antiquity of 
 the Pentateuch generally ; secondly, as shew- 
 ing that this chapter, which is markedly Je- 
 hovistic, is also of marked antiquity, ‘Those, 
 
 who accuse the so-called Jehovistic chapters 
 of being modern (of the date of Samuel for 
 instance), ground their arguments on a minute 
 criticism of the difference of the words used 
 by the Elohist and the Jehovist writers re- 
 spectively, It is, however, here very appa- 
 rent, that the word child, ‘‘nangar,” had not, 
 in the time of the writer of this most Jeho- 
 vistic history, been distinguished in the singu- 
 lar number into masculine and feminine, 
 nangar and nangarah, boy and girl. 
 
 thereby shall I know] Perhaps more cor- 
 rectly ‘“‘by her shall I know;” though the 
 Versions generally render the feminine pro- 
 noun here by a neuter, the Hebrew having no 
 neuter gender. 
 
 15. who was born to Bethuel] See ch. 
 XXii, 20 and note, 
 
 21. wondering at her| ‘* Amazed and 
 astonished” at finding his prayer so suddenly 
 answered, 
 
 22. earring| So LXX., Vulg., but per- 
 haps more probably ‘‘ nose-ring.” St Jerome 
 in Ezek, xvi, 11, 12, mentions that to his day 
 the women in the East wore golden rings 
 hanging down from their foreheads, on their 
 noses, Hence here the marginal reading gives 
 ‘‘jewel for the forehead,” ‘To the present 
 
 149 
 
150 GENES ESsex-x Ibe [v. 23—41 
 
 her hands of ten shefels weight of 
 gold ; 
 
 23 And said, Whose daughter art 
 thou? tell me, I pray thee: is there 
 room in thy father’s house for us to 
 lodge in? 
 
 24 And she said unto him, I am 
 the daughter of Bethuel the son of 
 Milcah, which she bare unto Nahor. 
 
 25 She said moreover unto him, 
 We have both straw and provender 
 enough, and room to lodge in. 
 
 26 And the man bowed down his 
 head, and worshipped the Lorp. 
 
 27 And he said, Blessed be the Lorp 
 God of my master Abraham, who hath 
 not left destitute my master of his 
 mercy and his truth: I dezmg in the 
 way, the Lorp led me to the house 
 of my master’s brethren. 
 
 28 And the damsel ran, and told 
 them of her mother’s house these 
 things. 
 
 29 @ And Rebekah had a brother, 
 and his name was Laban: and Laban 
 ran out unto the man, unto the well. 
 
 30 And it came to pass, when he 
 saw the earring and bracelets upon 
 his sister’s hands, and when he heard 
 the words of Rebekah his sister, say- 
 ing, Thus spake the man unto me; 
 that he came unto the man; and, 
 behold, he stood by the camels at the 
 well. 
 
 31 And he said, Come in, thou 
 blessed of the Lorp; wherefore 
 standest thou without? for I have 
 prepared the house, and room for the 
 camels, 
 
 day some Eastern nations wear nose-rings. 
 Schroeder (‘De Vest. Mul. Hebr.’ c. xxii. § 
 2). Hartmann (‘Hebr,’ 11. 166); Winer (‘R, 
 W.B,’ 1.162); Gesen. (‘ Th.’ p. 870); Rosen- 
 miiller (in loc.), argue for the rendering 
 ‘‘nose-ring” in this passage. —The word, how- 
 over, simply signifies a ring. 
 
 half a shekel| Probably about 2 drachms 
 or a quarter of an ounce, See on ch. xxxiii. 14. 
 
 28. her mother’s house| Her father Be- 
 thuel was still living (see v. 50); but the 
 mother is mentioned, perhaps because even 
 thus early women may have lived in se- 
 parate tents from the men (Rashi): which 
 
 32 4 And the man came into the 
 house: and he ungirded his camels, 
 and gave straw and provender for the 
 camels, and water to wash his feet, and 
 the men’s feet that were with him. 
 
 33 And there was set meat before 
 him to eat: but he said, I will not 
 eat, until [ have told mine errand. 
 And he said, Speak on. 
 
 34 And he said, I am Abraham’s 
 servant. 
 
 35 And the Lorn hath blessed my 
 master greatly; and he is become 
 great: and he hath given him flocks, 
 and herds, and silver, and gold, and 
 menservants, and maidservants, and 
 camels, and asses. 
 
 36 And Sarah my master’s wife 
 bare a son to my master when she 
 was old: and unto him hath he given 
 all that he hath. 
 
 37 And my master made me swear, 
 saying, [hou shalt not take a wife to 
 my son of the daughters of the Canaan- 
 ites, in whose land I dwell: 
 
 38 But thou shalt go unto my 
 father’s house, and to my kindred, 
 and take a wife unto my son. 
 
 39 And I said unto my master, 
 Peradventure the woman will not 
 follow me. 
 
 40 And he said unto me, The 
 Lorn, before whom I walk, will send 
 his angel with thee, and prosper thy 
 way; and thou shalt take a wife for 
 my son of my kindred, and of my 
 father’s house: } 
 
 41 Then shalt thou be clear from 
 this my oath, when thou comest to 
 
 appears also from v. 67, where Sarah’s tent 
 is named, and Rebekah is installed in it at 
 her marriage. ‘The daughter naturally went 
 to tell her mother rather than her father of 
 what the servant of Abraham had done; the 
 jewel, which he gave her, being perhaps in- 
 tended to denote the nature of his embassage, 
 
 33. I will not eat, until I have told mine 
 errand| Ancient hospitality taught men to 
 set meat before their guests before asking 
 them their names and their business; but 
 here the servant of Abraham felt his message 
 to be so momentous, that he would not eat 
 till he had unburdened himself of it, 
 
Wer: 13. 
 
 Brass 8) GENESIS. XXIV. 151 
 
 my kindred; and if they give not 
 thee one, thou shalt be clear from my 
 oath. 
 
 42 And I came this day unto the 
 well, and said, O Lorp God of my 
 master Abraham, if now thou do pro- 
 sper my way which I go: 
 
 43 “Behold, I stand by the well of 
 water; and it shall come to pass, that 
 when the virgin cometh forth to draw 
 water, and I say to her, Give me, I 
 pray thee, a little water of thy pitcher 
 to drink; 
 
 44 And she say to me, Both drink 
 thou, and I will also draw for thy 
 camels: Jet the same be the woman 
 whom the Lorp hath appointed out 
 for my master’s son. 
 
 45 And before I had done speaking 
 in mine heart, behold, Rebekah came 
 forth with her pitcher on her shoulder ; 
 and she went down unto the well, and 
 drew water: and I said unto her, Let 
 me drink, I pray thee. 
 
 46 And she made haste, and let 
 down her pitcher from her shoulder, 
 and said, Drink, and I will give thy 
 camels drink also: so I drank, and 
 she made the camels drink also. 
 
 47 And I asked her, and said, 
 Whose daughter art thou? And she 
 said, The daughter of Bethuel, Nahor’s 
 son, whom Milcah bare unto him: and 
 I put the earring upon her face, and 
 the bracelets upon her hands. 
 
 48 And I bowed down my head, 
 and worshipped the Lorn, and blessed 
 the Lorp God of my master Abra- 
 ham, which had led me in the right 
 
 50. Laban and Bethuel| The brother is 
 here put before the father, and in v. 39 the 
 brother only is mentioned, It appears that 
 in those days the brother was much con- 
 sulted concerning the marriage of his sisters 
 (Cp. ch, xxxiv. 13; Judg. xxi. 22): but it 
 has also been observed that Bethuel is alto- 
 gether kept in the background in this history, 
 as though he were a person of insignificant 
 character, see ch, xxix. 6, where he is alto- 
 gether passed over, Laban being called the 
 son of Nahor, who was his grandfather. (See 
 Blunt’s ‘ Coincidences,’ p. 35, and Words- 
 worth in loc,) Laban was evidently an active 
 stirring man, as is manifested throughout the 
 
 way to take my master’s brother’s 
 daughter unto his son. 
 
 49 And now if ye will deal kindly 
 and truly with my master, tell me: 
 and if not, tell me; that I may turn 
 to the right hand, or to the left. 
 
 50 Then Laban and Bethuel an- 
 swered and said, ‘The thing proceedeth 
 from the Lorp: we cannot speak un- 
 to thee bad or good. 
 
 51 Behold, Rebekah zs before thee, 
 take her, and go, and let her be thy 
 master’s son’s wife, as the Lorp hath 
 spoken. 
 
 52 And it came to pass, that, when 
 Abraham’s servant heard their words, 
 he worshipped the Lorn, bowing him- 
 self to the earth. 
 
 53 And the servant brought forth 
 t jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, + Heb. 
 and raiment, and gave them to Re- *““* 
 bekah: he gave also to her brother 
 and to her mother precious things. 
 
 54 And they did eat and drink, he 
 and the men that were with him, and 
 tarried all night; and they rose up in 
 the morning, and he said, “Send me « Ver. s6. 
 away unto my master. sa 
 
 55 And her brother and her mother 
 said, Let the damsel abide with us '¢@'0r 
 
 dl a) 
 few days, at the least ten; after that <r fen 
 
 she shall go. ee 
 56 And he said unto them, Hinder 
 me not, seeing the Lorn hath pro- 
 spered my way; send me away that 
 I may go to my master. 
 57 And they said, We will call the 
 damsel, and inquire at her mouth. 
 
 58 And they called Rebekah, 
 
 subsequent history of Jacob, The Hebrew 
 tradition was that Bethuel died on the day that 
 Eliezer, Abraham’s servant, arrived (Tar- 
 gum of Pseudo- Jonathan, on v. 55). Josephus 
 (‘ Ant.’ 1, 16) speaks of him as dead, which, 
 however, is unlikely, see on ch, xxvii, 2. 
 
 53. jewels of silver, &c.] Lit, ‘vessels 
 of silver,” &c, 
 
 55. days, at the least ten] Lit, “days 
 or ten,” Certain days or at least ten; uniess 
 ‘‘days” be a phrase for the regular period 
 of seven days, i.e. a week, when it would be 
 ‘6a week of days or ten days,” 
 
152 
 
 7 chap. 16. 
 
 14. & 25. 
 11. 
 
 E Or, 
 
 to pray. 
 
 and said unto her, Wilt thou go with 
 this man? And she said, I will go. 
 
 59 And they sent away Rebekah 
 their sister, and her nurse, and Abra- 
 ham’s servant, and his men. 
 
 60 And they blessed Rebekah, and 
 said unto her, Thou art our sister, be 
 thou the mother of thousands of mil- 
 lions, and let thy seed possess the gate 
 of those which hate them. 
 
 61 © And Rebekah arose, and her 
 damsels, and they rode upon the 
 camels, and followed the man: and 
 the servant took Rebekah, and went 
 his way. 
 
 62 And Isaac came from the way 
 of the “well Lahai-roi; for he dwelt 
 in the south country. 
 
 63 And Isaac went out 'to medi- 
 tate in the field at the eventide: and 
 he lifted up his eyes, and saw, and, 
 behold, the camels were coming. 
 
 GENESIS. XXIV. 
 
 [v. 5967. 
 
 64 And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, 
 and when she saw Isaac, she lighted 
 off the camel. . 
 
 65 For she had said unto the ser- 
 vant, What man 7s this that walketh 
 in the field to meet us? And the ser- 
 vant had said, It 1s my master: there- 
 
 fore she took a vail, and covered her- | 
 
 self, 
 
 66 And the servant told Isaac all 
 things that he had done. | 
 
 67 And Isaac brought her into his 
 mother Sarah’s tent, and took Rebe- 
 kah, and she became his wife; and he 
 loved her: and Isaac was comforted 
 after his mother’s death. 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 1 The sons of Abraham by Keturah. 5 The 
 division of his goods. 7% His age, and death. 
 9g His burial. 12 The generations of Ish- 
 mae. 17 Hrs age, and death. 19 Isaac pray- 
 eth for Rebekah, being barren. 22 The children 
 
 59. their sister] Only one brother is 
 mentioned, viz. Laban: but her relatives gene- 
 rally are spoken of here, as saying of her, 
 ‘Thou art our sister,” sister being used in 
 that wide sense for relation, in which brother 
 is so often found in Scripture. 
 
 her nurse} Her name, Deborah, and her 
 death are mentioned ch, xxxv. 8. 
 
 62. And Isaac came from the way of the 
 well of Lahai-roi| Perhaps ‘‘Isaac had come 
 from a journey to Lahai-roi,” or ‘‘ had returned 
 from going to Lahai-roi.” 
 
 for he dwelt in the south country] Probably at 
 Beer-sheba. Abraham’s later dwelling places 
 had been Hebron and Beer-sheba, After the 
 sacrifice of Isaac, we find him dwelling at 
 Beer-sheba (xxii. 19), until we hear of the 
 death of Sarah at Hebron. Very probably 
 Abraham returned after this to Beer-sheba, 
 And so Isaac, whether living with his father, 
 or pitching his tent and feeding his flocks near 
 him, is here represented as dwelling in the 
 south country. In ch. xxv, 11 we find that, 
 after Abraham’s death, Isaac took up his 
 residence at Lahai-roi, to which we find that 
 he had been on a visit, when Rebekah arrived, 
 where perhaps he had already been pasturing 
 his flocks and herds (Knobel). All this is 
 in the strictest harmony; though the German 
 critics discover the hand of the Elohist in 
 chapter xxiii., and in the earlier verses of xxv., 
 and that of the Jehovist throughout xxiv. 
 
 63. to meditate} So LXX., Vulg., but 
 the Targg., Sam., Arab., Saad., Rashi, ren- 
 
 der ‘‘to pray;” some (Syr., Aben-Ezra) ‘to 
 walk.” ‘The word, however, appears most 
 probably to signify religious meditation (see 
 Ges, ‘Thes,’ p. 1322). Such occupation 
 seems very characteristic of Isaac, whose 
 whole life was so tranquil, and his temper 
 and spirit so calm and submissive, as suiting 
 one who was made an eminent type of Him, 
 who ‘‘was oppressed and afflicted, yet He 
 opened not His mouth: He was brought as 
 a lamb to the slaughter; and as a sheep be- 
 fore her shearers is dumb, so He opened not 
 His mouth” (Is. liii. 7). St Jerome (‘ Qu. in 
 Gen.’) sees in this quiet meditation and prayer 
 a type of Him ‘*‘ who went out into a moun- 
 tain apart to pray” (Matt. xiv. 23). 
 
 64. lighted off the camel] ‘It is cus- 
 tomary for both men and women, when an 
 Emir or great personage is approaching, to 
 alight some time before he comes up with 
 them. Women frequently refuse to ride in 
 the presence of men; and when a company of 
 them are to pass through a town, they often 
 dismount and walk,” (Thomson, ‘ Land and 
 Book,’ p. 593.) | 
 
 65. a vail] ‘The long cloak-like vail, 
 with which the Eastern women covered their 
 faces (see Jerome in loc, and in ‘Comment. 
 ad Jes.’ 111.; Tertullian, ‘De velandis Virgi- 
 nibus’ (Cap, xvi.), Even at this early period 
 it seems to have been the custom for brides 
 not to suffer the bridegroom to see their faces 
 before marriage (cp. ch, xxix, 23, 25), 
 
 -67. Sarah's tent] See onv. 28, 
 
Chron. 
 
 32. 
 
 strive in her womb. 24 The birth of Esau and 
 Jacob. 27 Their difference. 29 Esau selleth 
 his birthright. 
 HEN again Abraham tookawife, 
 i and her name was Keturah. 
 
 2 And “she bare him Zimran, and 
 Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and 
 Ishbak, and Shuah. 
 
 3 And Jokshan begat Sheba, and 
 Dedan. And the sons of Dedan 
 were Asshurim, and Letushim, and 
 Leummim. 
 
 GENESIS XV, 
 
 4 And the sons of Midian; Ephah, 
 and Epher, and Hanoch, and Abidah, 
 and Eldaah. All these were the chil- 
 dren of Keturah. 
 
 5 4 And Abraham gave all that he 
 
 had unto Isaac. 
 - 6 But unto the sons of the concu- 
 bines, which Abraham had, Abraham 
 gave gifts, and sent them away from 
 Isaac his son, while he yet lived, east- 
 ward, unto the east country. 
 
 7 And these are the days of the years . 
 
 CHAP, XXV_.1. Then again Abraham took 
 a wife, and her name was Keturah| ‘The 
 later Targg. and some other Jewish commen- 
 tators (Rashi and R. Eliezer, in ‘ Pirke,’ c. 
 30; see also Jerome, ‘Qu. in Gen.”), say that 
 Keturah was the same as Hagar, whom Abra- 
 ham took again, after Sarah’s death. This 
 seems inconsistent with v. 6, which speaks of 
 ‘‘the concubines” in the plural, meaning, 
 doubtless, Hagar and Keturah. The latter, 
 though called wife here, is called concubine 
 in x Chron, i. 32. Moreover, in 1 Chron, i. 
 28, 32, the sons of Keturah are named sepa- 
 rately from Isaac and Ishmael, ‘The concu- 
 bine (Pilegesh) was a kind of secondary wife, 
 sometimes called ‘‘ the concubine wife,” Judg. 
 eae 5. xv. 16; xx, 3. It is generally 
 supposed, that Abraham did not take Keturah 
 to wife, till after Sarah’s death. So the fa- 
 thers generally. Abraham lived to the age of 
 175. If we consider this extreme old age as 
 equivalent to eighty-five or ninety in the pre- 
 sent day, his age at the time of Sarah’s death 
 would correspond to that of a man of from 
 sixty-five to seventy now. 
 
 Some, however, think, that Abraham took 
 Keturah to be a secondary wife, during 
 Sarah’s life, though no mention is made of 
 this marriage till this time, as the chief pur- 
 pose of mentioning it was that some account 
 should be given of Keturah’s children, So 
 Keil, Poole (in ‘Dict. of Bible’), &c, It is 
 impossible to decide this question, as the text 
 gives no note of time, The Authorised Ver- 
 sion indeed renders, ‘‘Then again Abraham 
 took a wife,” but the Hebrew only conveys 
 the notion that Abraham took another wife, 
 
 2. she bare him Zimran| Josephus (‘A. 
 J.’ 1. 15) tells us that the descendants of 
 Keturah occupied the Troglodyte country 
 and Arabia Felix, which statement is repeated 
 by Jerome (‘Qu, Heb, in Gen.’), Some of their 
 names occur among the Arab tribes, but it is 
 not easy to identify them all clearly 
 ' Zimran has been thought to be identified 
 with the Zabram of Ptolemy (VI. 7, 5), the 
 royal city of the Cinedocolpite to the West 
 
 of Mecca, on the Red Sea; Jokshan with the 
 Cassanitz on the Red Sea (Ptol. VI. 7, 6); 
 Ishbak with Shobek, in Idumza (Knobel, 
 Del., Keil). 
 
 Medan, and Midian] In ch. xxxvil, 28, 36, 
 the Midianites and Medanites are identified. 
 The Midianites dwelt partly in the peninsula 
 of Sinai, partly beyond Jordan, in the neigh- 
 bourhood of the Moabites, We meet with 
 them first as the merchants to whom Joseph 
 was sold by his brethren (as ch, xxxvil. 28 
 sqq.), trafficking between Egypt and Canaan, 
 Next we find Moses flying to the land of Mi- 
 dian, and marrying the daughter of a priest 
 of Midian, Exod, il. 15, 16, 21, whose flocks 
 pastured in the desert, in the neighbourhood 
 of Mount Horeb (Ex. iii. 1), Later we find 
 the people of Midian in immediate juxta-po- 
 sition with the Moabites (Num, xxii, 4, xxv. 
 6, 17, 18). We find them afterwards as for- 
 midable neighbours to the Israelites, invading 
 and oppressing them, though afterwards ex- 
 
 pelled and conquered (Judg. vi. vil. vili.). It 
 
 has been thought that traces of the name of 
 Midian may be found in Modiana on the 
 Eastern coast of the Elanitic Gulf men- 
 tioned by Ptolemy (VI. 7), (Knobel), 
 
 3. Sheba, and Dedan| Are named, ch, 
 x. 7, among the descendants of Cush, It has 
 been thought that in these, as in other in- 
 stances, the Shemite and Hamite races inter- 
 married, and that there consequently arose a 
 certain confusion in their names, or that very 
 probably they adopted names from those with 
 whom they were thus connected (see on ch, 
 x, 6, 7; also Ges, ‘ Thes,’ p. 322). 
 
 4. Ephab| We meet with this Midian- 
 itish tribe in Is, lx. 6, as a people rich in 
 camels and gold and incense, ‘The attempts 
 to identify the various descendants of Ketu- 
 rah, mentioned in this chapter, with the 
 names of tribes or cities known to later geo- 
 graphers and historians, may be seen in Kno- 
 bel, Del., Keil, &c, The uncertainty of such 
 identification is very great. 
 
 6. eastward, unto the east country| That 
 
 piers) 
 
154 
 of Abraham’s life which he lived; an 
 
 hundred threescore and fifteen years. 
 
 8 Then Abraham gave up the 
 ghost, and died in a good old age, an 
 old man, and full of years; and was 
 gathered to his people. 
 
 g And his sons Isaac and Ishmael 
 buried him in the cave of Machpelah, 
 in the field of Ephron the son of 
 Zohar the Hittite, which zs before 
 Mamre; 
 
 10 The field which Abraham pur- 
 chased of the sons of Heth: there was 
 Abraham buried, and Sarah his wife. 
 
 11 4 And it came to pass after the 
 death of Abraham, that God blessed 
 his son Isaac; and Isaac dwelt by the 
 chap 26. ¢well Lahai-roi. 
 
 ® chap. 23, 
 10, 
 
 & 24.52 12 | Now these are the generations 
 of Ishmael, Abraham’s son, whom 
 Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah’s hand- 
 maid, bare unto Abraham: 
 
 ae ee eet And “these are the names of 
 
 the sons of Ishmael, by their names, 
 according to their generations: the 
 firstborn of Ishmael, Nebajoth; and 
 Kedar, and Adbeel, and Mibsam, 
 
 is into Arabia, the inhabitants of which were 
 called Bene-Kedem, ‘‘children of the East” 
 (Judg. vi. 3; 1 K. iv. 30; Jobi. 3; Is, xi. 14), 
 and afterwards ‘‘ Saracens,” i.e, ‘¢ Easterns,” 
 
 8. Abraham gave up the ghost] ‘The his- 
 tory of Abraham is thus wound up before 
 the history of Isaac’s family is told, Abra- 
 ham did not die till Jacob and Esau were 
 born, Indeed they were fifteen years old at 
 Abraham’s death: for he died at 175, Isaac 
 was then seventy-five years old, but Esau 
 and Jacob were born when Isaac was sixty 
 (see v. 26). 
 
 was gathered to his people] This cannot 
 mean that he was buried where his fathers 
 had been buried, for he had been a hundred 
 years a pilgrim in the land of Israel, far from 
 the home of his ancestors, and he was buried 
 in the cave of Machpelah. ‘The place therefore 
 seems to indicate the belief of the patriarchal 
 ages in a place of departed spirits, to which 
 the souls of the dead were gathered. ‘Thus 
 Jacob expected to ‘‘go down into the grave 
 (to Sheol) unto his son,” though he did not 
 believe his son to have been buried, but to 
 have been devoured by wild beasts (ch, xxxvii, 
 353 compare also Deut. xxxil. 50). St Au- 
 gustine (‘Qu. in Gen,’268) interprets the words 
 ‘‘his people,” of ‘the people of that city, 
 
 GRIME SIS] 22evi 
 
 [v. 8—2 I. 
 
 14 And Mishma, and Dumah, and 
 
 assa, 
 
 15 'Hadar, and Tema, Jetur, Na- 
 phish, and Kedemah: 
 
 16 ‘These are the sons of Ishmael, 
 and these are their names, by their 
 towns, and by their castles; twelve 
 princes according to their nations. 
 
 17 And these are the years of the 
 life of Ishmael, an hundred and thirty 
 and seven years: and he gave up the 
 ghost and died; and was gathered 
 unto his people. 
 
 18 And they dwelt from Havilah 
 unto Shur, that zs before Egypt, as 
 thou goest toward Assyria: and he 
 ‘died in the presence of all his bre- Heb. 
 
 fell, 
 thren. 
 
 19 4 And these are the genera- 
 tions of Isaac, Abraham’s son: Abra- 
 ham begat Isaac: | 
 
 20 And Isaac was forty years old 
 when he took Rebekah to wife, the 
 daughter of Bethuel the Syrian of 
 Padan-aram, the sister to Laban the 
 Syrian. 
 
 21 And Isaac intreated the Lorp 
 
 the heavenly Jerusalem,” spoken of in Heb, 
 xli, 22, and which God is said to have pre- 
 pared for the faithful patriarchs, Heb, xi. 16. 
 
 9. his sons Isaac and Ishmael] From 
 this we see that Ishmael, though sent to dwell 
 Eastward, had not lost sight of his father 
 and Isaac; and very probably their father’s 
 death reconciled the two brothers to each 
 other. Isaac is put first as the heir, and the 
 heir of the promises, 
 
 16. castles] See on Num. xxxi. ro. 
 
 19. And these are the generations of Isaac, 
 Abraham's son] ‘This is the beginning of a 
 new Section in the history of Genesis, which 
 continues to the end of ch, xxxv, Accord- 
 ing to the uniform plan of the author, there 
 is a brief recapitulation, in order to make 
 the Section complete. In this case it is very — 
 brief, consisting of the latter part of v. 19, 
 and v, 20. 
 
 20. the Syrian of Padan-aram| The 
 Aramean of Padan-aram. Padan-aram 
 is the ‘‘plain or flat land of Aram,” translated 
 or paraphrased in Hosea xii, 12 by Sédeh- 
 Aram, ‘‘the field or plain of Aram,” In the 
 last chapter the country of Rebekah is called 
 Aram-Naharaim, or Aram of the two rivers, 
 See on ch, xxiv, 10. ‘There is no reasonable 
 foundation for the belief that Padan-aram 
 
Vv. 22—25.| 
 
 for his wife, because she was barren: 
 and the Lorp was intreated of him, 
 and Rebekah his wife conceived. 
 
 22 And the children struggled to- 
 gether within her; and she said, If zt 
 be so, why am I thus? And she went 
 to inquire of the Lorp. 
 
 23 And the Lorp said unto her, 
 Two nations are in thy womb, and 
 
 was the old name used by the so-called Elo- 
 hist, Aram-Naharaim being the name which 
 had been adopted by the later Jehovist. It 
 was natural that the historian, when relating 
 the embassy of Eliezer of Damascus to Me- 
 sopotamia to seek a wife for Isaac, should 
 have used the general name of the country 
 into which Eliezer was sent, whereas in the 
 present Section more particularity is to be 
 expected, where Jacob is described as sojourn- 
 ing for years in Padan-aram, the Jand of 
 Laban; just as in one case it might be natural 
 to speak of going into Scotland, whilst in a 
 more detailed account, we might prefer to 
 speak of the Highlands of Scotland, or the 
 Lowlands, or of some particular county or 
 district. 
 
 21. Isaac intreated the Lorp for his 
 wife, because she was barren| ‘This barren- 
 ness had lasted twenty years (v. 26). An- 
 other instance of the delay in the fulfilment 
 of God’s promises, and of the trial of the 
 faith of those for whom the greatest blessings 
 are reserved, ‘The word here used for prayer 
 is by many thought to mean frequent and re- 
 peated prayer; implying the anxious desire of 
 Isaac to be blessed with offspring. Gesenius 
 (p. 1085) thinks the word is connected with 
 a root signifying ‘‘to offer incense,” which 
 certainly appears to belong to it in Ezek, viii. 
 1x. If it be so, we must believe that the pa- 
 triarchal worship, which from the earliest 
 times was accompanied with sacrifice, had 
 also, whether from Divine revelation or from 
 an instinctive feeling, adopted the use of in- 
 cense, 
 
 22. If it be so, why am I thus?] An 
 obscure saying. ‘The Vulg. and Targums 
 render, ‘‘If it was to be thus with me, why 
 did I conceive?” ‘The Arabic has, ‘If I 
 had known it would be thus, I would not 
 have sought for offspring.” Much to the same 
 effect Rashi, ‘‘If such be the sufferings of 
 pregnancy, why did I desire it?” ‘The Syriac 
 and most of the German Comm, understand 
 it, ‘‘If it be so, wherefore do I live?” 
 
 And she went to inquire of the Lorp| By 
 prayer, or by sacrifice, perhaps at some spe- 
 cial place of prayer; as to the domestic altar 
 of Isaac (Theodor, ‘Qu, in Gen,’), or more 
 
 2B SIRT pout shy lp Gh 
 
 T5 
 
 two manner of people shall be sepa- 
 rated from thy bowels; and the one 
 people shall be stronger than the other 
 
 people; and “the elder shall serve the ¢ Rom: 9. 
 
 younger. 
 24 4 And when her days to be de- 
 livered were fulfilled, behold, there 
 
 were twins in her womb, 
 25 And the first came out red, all 
 
 likely, by going to a prophet. The Jerusa- 
 lem ‘Targum, followed by several Jewish 
 commentators says, she went to Shem; others 
 say to Melchizedec. Abraham, who was 
 still living, was the head of the family then 
 dwelling in Palestine; he had been specially 
 honoured by revelations from heaven; and 
 was probably esteemed the patriarch-priest of 
 the whole race, It is most likely, therefore, 
 that if the inquiry was made through a man, 
 it would have been made through him, Still 
 we may conclude with St Augustine (‘ Qu.’ 
 72), that nothing is certain except that Re- 
 bekah went to ask of the Lord, and that the 
 Lord answered her, 
 
 23. Two nations, &c.| ‘The response is 
 in antistrophic parallelisms, a poetic form, in 
 which no doubt it was more readily handed 
 down from father to son: 
 
 Two nations are in thy womp: 
 
 and two peoples shall be sepa- 
 rated from thy bowels; 
 
 and nation shall be stronger than 
 nation, 
 
 and the elder 
 younger. 
 
 shall serve the 
 
 To this see the reference Mal. i. 2, 3, ‘¢ Jacob 
 have I loved, and Esau have I hated,” and in 
 Rom, ix. 10o—13, where St Paul shews that 
 election to the privilege of being the deposi- 
 tories of God’s truth and the Church of God 
 on earth is inscrutable, but not therefore ne- 
 cessarily unjust or unmerciful, Such election 
 indeed plainly marks that God does not choose 
 men as His instruments because of their merits, 
 but it does not shew that He is therefore sim- 
 ply arbitrary. In all there is a hidden stream 
 of mercy flowing. ‘The chosen race shall be 
 made the means of salvation to others as well 
 astothemselves, Their privileges will be blessed 
 to them, if they use those privileges faithfully. 
 Otherwise whilst they are the channels of God’s 
 grace to their brethren, they themselves will 
 be cast out, and others shall come into their 
 inheritance, 
 
 25. red, all over like an hairy garment] 
 He seemed as if covered with a kind of fur, a 
 thick down, which is said to be found on some 
 new born infants, It gave an animal appear- 
 
over like an hairy garment; and they 
 called his name Esau. 
 26 And after that came his brother 
 
 Hos. x2, Out, and“his hand took hold on Esau’s 
 3- : 
 
 heel; and his name was called Jacob: 
 and saac was threescore years old 
 ‘when she bare them. 
 
 27 And the boys grew: and Esau 
 was a cunning hunter, a man of the 
 field; and Jacob was a plain man, 
 dwelling in tents. 
 
 28 And Isaac loved Esau, because 
 
 ance to Esau, and probably indicated his more 
 sensual nature. Owing to this he was called 
 Esau, ‘‘hairy.” 
 
 Jacob] Meaning, literally, ‘‘he holds the 
 ‘heel;” but, from the act of a person tripping 
 ‘up an adversary in wrestling or running by 
 taking hold of the heel, it signifies also to 
 ‘trip up,” ‘‘to outwit,” ‘‘to supplant.” (See 
 XXVil, 36). 
 
 27. a cunning hunter] Skilled in hunt- 
 ing. Instead of following the quiet pastoral 
 life of his forefathers, Esau preferred the wilder 
 life of a hunter, betokening his wild, restless, 
 self-indulgent character, and leading him pro- 
 bably to society with the heathen Canaanites 
 round about. 
 
 a man of the field| ‘This is antithetic to 
 what follows, ‘‘a dweller in tents.” It pro- 
 bably indicates still more fully the wild life of 
 Esau. Instead of spending his life in the society 
 of his family, returning to his tent after the 
 day’s labour at night, he roved over the coun- 
 try, like the uncivilized hunters in half savage 
 lands, 
 
 Jacob was a plain man] An upright 
 man, a man of steady, domestic, moral 
 habits. 
 
 dwelling in tents] i.e, staying at home, at- 
 tending to the pasturing of the flocks and the 
 business of the family, instead of wandering 
 abroad in search of pleasure and amusement. 
 (See Ges, ‘’Thes,’ p. 634.) 
 
 28. Isaac loved Esau, because he did eat 
 of his venison] Lit. ‘‘ because venison was in 
 his mouth,” ‘The bold daring of Esau was, 
 perhaps by force of contrast, pleasant to the 
 quiet spirit of Isaac. ‘That quiet temper was 
 not strong enough to rule such a restless 
 youth; there was also a marked selfishness in 
 Isaac’s affection, which brought with it its 
 own punishment. ‘The mother, on the con- 
 trary, loved the well-conducted and helpful 
 Jacob. Yet her love too was not guided b 
 the highest: principle, and so led her and her 
 
 GENESIS... XXY; [v. 26—32. 
 
 "he did eat of bis venison: but Rebe- ! Heb. 
 kah loved Jacob. was in his 
 29 { And Jacob sod pottage: and”? 
 
 Esau came from the field, and he was 
 faint : 
 30 And Esau said to Jacob, Feed 
 me, I pray thee, ‘with that same red t Heb. 
 pottage; for I am faint: therefore was 747 «on 
 his name called 'Edom. ii 
 31 And Jacob said, Sell me this hat is 
 day thy birthright. as” 
 32 And Esau said, Behold, I am 
 
 favourite son to sin against truth and justice, 
 and brought heavy trials and sorrows on them 
 both, ; 
 
 30. Feed me, I pray thee, with that same 
 red pottage] Let me, I pray thee, de- 
 vour some of that red, that red. The 
 words express the vehemence of the appetite, 
 and probably the very words uttered by Esau 
 in his impatient hunger and weariness, ‘The 
 red lentil is still esteemed in the East, and has 
 been found very palatable by modern travel- 
 lers (Robinson, ‘Bib, Res.’ I. 246). Dr Kitto 
 says he often partook of a red pottage made 
 of lentils, ‘‘‘The mess had the redness, which 
 gained for it the name of red” (‘Pict. Bib.’ 
 Gen, xxv. 30, quoted in Smith’s ‘Dict. of 
 Bib,’ 11. 92). It is also described by Thom- 
 son, ‘‘ Land and Book,’ p. 587, as exhaling an 
 odour very tempting to a hungry man, 
 
 therefore was hisname called Edom] Names 
 appear to have been frequently given from ac- 
 cidental causes, especially in the East; and 
 sometimes the occurrence of more than one 
 circumstance to the same person seems to 
 have riveted a name. ‘Thus we read above 
 that Esau was born with red hair and colour, 
 His frantic demand for red pottage and selling 
 his birthright to gain it, may have conspired 
 with his hair and complexion to stamp the 
 name Edom (or Red) upon him, ‘The con- 
 jecture of Tuch and others, that the name 
 was connected with the Red Sea, near which 
 the Edomites dwelt, is wholly groundless, 
 The Red Sea was never so called in early 
 times, or in Semitic tongues, ‘The name Red 
 was given in later days to this sea by the 
 Greeks, ° 
 
 31. Sell me this day thy birthright] It is ; 
 doubtful what privileges the birthright car- 
 ried with it in patriarchal times, In after 
 times a double portion of the patrimony was 
 assigned to the firstborn by law (Deut. xxi, 
 Is—17); but in the earliest days the respect 
 paid to the eldest son is very apparent; and 
 as the family spread out into a tribe, the 
 patriarchal head became .a chieftain or prince, 
 
Vv. 33—1.] 
 
 tat the point to die: and what profit 
 shall this birthright do to me? 
 
 3 And Jacob said, Swear to me 
 this day; and he sware unto him: 
 and fhe sold his birthright unto 
 Jacob. 
 
 34 Then Jacob gave Esau bread 
 and pottage of lentiles; and he did 
 eat and drink, and rose up, and went 
 his way: thus Esau despised /zs birth- 
 right. 
 
 It also looks as if the head of the family exer- 
 cised a kind of priesthood. ‘Then the father’s 
 chief blessing was given to his firstborn son. 
 Above all, in the family of Abraham, there 
 was a promise of peculiar spiritual privileges, 
 which, if not fully understood, would have 
 been much dwelt upon by believing minds, 
 All this was to Esau of little account com- 
 pared with the desire of present gratification 
 of appetite. It has been thought, not im- 
 probably, that the famine impending (see 
 xxvi, 1) was already, more or less, pressing on 
 the family of Isaac (Lightfoot, ‘Harm. of 
 O. T.’ in loc.), Esau had perhaps been seek- 
 ing in vain for food in the chase, whilst Jacob 
 had prepared a mess of pottage, sufficient to 
 relieve the pains of hunger. If it were so, 
 Esau, wearied and famished, may have been 
 strongly tempted to give up much for food, 
 But his worldly and ‘‘profane” character is 
 exhibited in his contempt for that, which was, 
 whether in a worldly or in a spiritual point of 
 view, rather an object of faith or sentiment, 
 than of sight and sense, Jacob, a man of 
 widely different character, had probably looked 
 with reverence onthe spiritual promises, though 
 with culpable ambition for the personal pre- 
 eminence of the firstborn. He and Esau were 
 twins, and it may have seemed hard to him 
 to be shut out from the chief hope of his 
 house by one not older than himself, and 
 whose character was little worthy of his posi- 
 tion, ‘This may be some excuse for his con- 
 duct, but the sacred history, whilst exposing 
 the carnal indifference of Esau, does not ex- 
 tenuate the selfishness of Jacob, ‘Throughout 
 their history, Esau is the bold, reckless, but 
 generous and openhearted man of this world; 
 Jacob, on the contrary, is a thoughtful, reli- 
 gious man, but with many infirmities, and 
 especially with that absence of simplicity and 
 uprightness, which often characterizes those 
 who have made their choice of heaven 
 and yet let their hearts linger too much on 
 earth, 
 
 The events correspond with the characters 
 of the men, Esau lives on his rough and 
 reckless life; though towards the end of it 
 
 GE NSS) ORV see VT. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 1 Zsaac because of famine went to Gerar. 2 God 
 instructeth, and blesseth him. 7 Hets reproved 
 by Abimelech for denying his wife. 12 He 
 groweth rich. 18 He diggeth Esek, Sitnah, 
 and Rehoboth. 26 Abimelech maketh a cove- 
 nant with him at Beer-sheba. 34 LEsau’s 
 WWLVES» 
 
 ND there was a famine in the 
 land, beside the first famine that 
 was in the days of Abraham. And 
 
 we see his better feelings overcoming his vin- 
 dictiveness, _ Whatever his own final state 
 with God may have been, he has disinherited 
 his children, left them wild men of the desert 
 and the rocks, instead of leaving them heirs 
 of the promises and ancestors of the Messiah, 
 Jacob, with a less prosperous life, has yet 
 gone through a long training and chastening 
 from the God of his fathers, to whose care 
 and guidance he had given himself; he suffers 
 heavily, but he learns from that he suffered ; 
 at last he goes down to Egypt to die, com- 
 forted in having his children yet alive, confess- 
 ing that few and evil had been the days of 
 the years of his pilgrimage, but yet able to 
 say in peaceful confidence upon his deathbed, 
 ‘¢] have waited for thy salvation, O Lorn.” 
 He has inherited the promises; but for trying 
 by unworthy means to anticipate the promise 
 of inheritance, he has to go through a life of 
 trial, sorrow, and discipline, and to die at last, 
 not in the land of promise, but in the house 
 of bondage. 
 
 Cuap, XXVI.1. <Abdimelech] It has been 
 doubted whether this be the Abimelech with 
 whom Abraham was concerned or not. The 
 events related in this chapter took place about 
 eighty years after those related in ch, xx. 
 It is not therefore impossible, when men 
 lived to 180, that the same king may still 
 have been reigning over the Philistines; and it 
 has been thought that the character described 
 here is very similar to that in ch, xx. It 
 seems more probable that the present Abime- 
 lech should have been the son or successor of 
 the earlier king, Names were very frequently 
 handed down ‘to the grandson, recurring al- 
 ternately, and this may very possibly have 
 been the case here: but moreover, Abimelech 
 (father king, or father of the king), may very 
 likely have been, like Pharaoh, a title rather 
 than a name, so also Phichol (¢he mouth of all, 
 i.e, commanding all), sounds like the title of 
 the commander in chief or the grand vizier, 
 Cipy xxiv a2) °xxvis 26: 
 
 Sika The chief city of the Philistines, 
 now Kirbet el Gerar. 
 
 157 
 
® chap. re. 
 3. & 15. 18, 
 
 & 22, 18, 
 
 Isaac went unto Abimelech king of 
 the Philistines unto Gerar. 
 
 2 And the Lorp appeared unto 
 him, and said, Go not down into 
 Egypt; dwell in the land which I 
 shall tell thee of: 
 
 3 Sojourn in this Jand, and I will 
 be with thee, and will bless thee; for 
 _unto thee, and unto thy seed, “I will 
 give all these countries, and I will 
 perform the oath which I sware unto 
 Abraham thy father ; 
 
 4 And I will make thy seed to 
 multiply as the stars of heaven, and 
 will give unto thy seed all these coun- 
 tries; and in thy seed shall all the 
 nations of the earth be “blessed ; 
 
 5 Because that Abraham obeyed 
 my voice, and kept my charge, my 
 commandments, my statutes, and my 
 laws. 
 
 6 { And Isaac dwelt in Gerar: 
 
 7 And the men of the place asked 
 him of his wife; and he said, She zs 
 my sister: for he feared to say, She zs 
 
 2. the Lorp appeared unto him] ‘The 
 last recorded vision was at the sacrifice of 
 Isaac more than sixty years before, ch, xxii. 
 These revelations were not so frequent as 
 they seem to us, as we read one event rapidly 
 after the other, but just sufficient to keep up 
 the knowledge of God and the faith of the 
 patriarchs in the line of the chosen people 
 and of the promised seed, 
 
 Go not down into Egypt] ‘In the first 
 famine, which was in the days of Abraham,” 
 Abraham had gone down to Egypt. Proba- 
 bly, after this example, and from the plenty 
 with which Egypt was blessed, Isaac had 
 purposed to go down there now. 
 
 3. Sojourn in this land| He was the 
 heir, to whom the land had been promised, 
 He is to dwell in it, as a stranger and so- 
 journer, and not to be tempted by suffering 
 to go down to that land of spiritual danger, 
 from which his father so narrowly escaped, 
 
 4. all these countries} The lands of the 
 different Canaanitish tribes named in ch, xv. 
 1g—21, The pronoun here rendered ‘‘ these” 
 is one of those ancient forms peculiar to the 
 Pentateuch (4a-e/; in the later books it would 
 be ha-eleh). 
 
 7. She is my sister| Isaac acted on this 
 occasion just as Abraham had done in Egypt 
 and in Philistia, Probably too, he called 
 Rebekah his sister because she was his cou- 
 
 GEN PSs) eee vee 
 
 [v. 2—r12, 
 
 my wife; lest, sazd he, the men of 
 the place should kill me for Rebekah; 
 because she was fair to look upon. 
 
 8 And it came to pass, when he 
 had been there a long time, that 
 Abimelech king of the Philistines look- 
 ed out at a window, and saw, and, 
 behold, Isaac was sporting with Re- 
 bekah his wife. 
 
 g And Abimelech called Isaac, and 
 said, Behold, of a surety she zs thy 
 wife: and how saidst thou, She zs my 
 sister? And Isaac said unto him, Be- 
 cause I said, Lest I die for her. 
 
 10 And Abimelech said, What zs 
 this thou hast done unto us? one of 
 the people might lightly have lien with 
 thy wife, and thou shouldest have 
 brought guiltiness upon us. 
 
 11 And Abimelech charged all his 
 people, saying, He that toucheth this 
 man or his wife shall surely be put to 
 death. 
 
 12 Then Isaac sowed in that land, 
 
 and ‘received in the same year PT nh 
 
 sin, and the deep importance of strict truth- 
 fulness had not been fully unfolded to the 
 patriarchs in their twilight state of faith, 
 The difference in the details of this story 
 and the events in the life of Abraham is too 
 marked to allow it to be thought that this is 
 only a repetition of the histories in ch, xii, 
 and xx, In the history of Abraham Sarah 
 was taken into the house of Pharaoh, and 
 afterwards into that of Abimelech, and in 
 both cases preserved by Divine intervention, 
 In the history of Isaac, there is no apparent 
 intention on the part of Abimelech to take 
 Rebekah into his house, but he accidentally 
 discovers that Isaac and Rebekah were not 
 brother and sister but husband and wife, and 
 then reproves Isaac for his concealment of 
 the truth, on the ground that so some of his 
 people might have ignorantly taken Rebekah 
 to wife, 
 
 12. sowed in that land] ‘The patriarchs 
 were not so wholly nomadic and _ pastoral 
 in their habits of life as to neglect agricul- 
 ture entirely, Even the Bedouins practise 
 agriculture at the present day as well as graz- 
 ing (Robinson, ‘B. R.’ Vol. 1. p. 77). 
 
 an hundredfold| An.-hundred measures; 
 z.e, probably a hundred measures for each 
 measure sown, a very unusual increase, though 
 not quite unknown in a virgin soil, especially 
 if the corn were barley. (The LXX. and 
 Syr, render here ‘a hundred of barley,” 
 
+ Heb. 
 living. 
 
 t That is, 
 Conten- 
 tion. 
 
 That is, 
 Hatred, 
 
 Vv. 13—29. | GENESIS. 
 hundredfold: and the Lorn blessed 
 him. 
 
 13 And the man waxed great, and 
 + went forward, and grew until he be- 
 came very great: 
 
 14 For he had possession of flocks, 
 
 and possession of herds, and great 
 store of "servants: and the Philistines 
 envied him. 
 15 For all the wells which his fa- 
 ther’s servants had digged in the days 
 of Abraham his father, the Philistines 
 had stopped them, and filled them 
 with earth. 
 
 16 And Abimelech said unto Isaac, 
 Go from us; for thou art much 
 mightier than we. 
 
 17 { And Isaac departed thence, 
 and pitched his tent in the valley of 
 Gerar, and dwelt there. 
 
 18 And Isaac digged again the 
 wells of water, which they had digged 
 in the days of Abraham his father; 
 for the Philistines had stopped them 
 after the death of Abraham: and he 
 called their names after the names by 
 which his father had called them. 
 
 19 And Isaac’s servants digged in 
 the valley, and found there a well of 
 t springing water. 
 
 20 And the herdmen of Gerar did 
 strive with Isaac’s herdmen, saying, 
 The water zs ours: and he called the 
 name of the well 'Esek; because they 
 strove with him. 
 
 21 And they digged another well, 
 and strove for that also: and he called 
 the name of it 'Sitnah. 
 
 which Michaelis and others have adopted. 
 The reading and rendering of the Authorised 
 Version are more generaliy supported, and are 
 probably correct.) The fertility of the soil 
 in this neighbourhood is still very great. 
 
 17. the valley of Gerar| ‘The word for 
 valley signifies properly the bed or course of a 
 stream or mountain torrent, awady, Itis not 
 easy to say which of the valleys running to 
 the sea, South of Beer-sheba, may be identified 
 with this valley of Gerar (see Robinson, 
 ‘ Physical Geography,’ p. 112). 
 
 22. Rehoboth] Probably identified as to 
 site with the Wady er-Ruhaibeh, where are 
 the ruins of an extensive city, eight hours 
 South of Beer-sheba, Here is an ancient well, 
 
 Oratak 
 
 22, And he removed from thence, 
 and digged another well; and for that 
 they strove not: and he called the 
 
 name of it 'Rehoboth; and he said, !Thatis, 
 oom. 
 
 For now the Lorp hath made room 
 for us, and we shall be fruitful in the 
 land. 
 
 23 And he went up from thence 
 to Beer-sheba. 
 
 24. And the Lorp appeared unto 
 him the same night, and said, I am 
 the God of Abraham thy father: fear 
 not, for I am with thee, and will bless 
 thee, and multiply thy seed for my 
 servant Abraham’s sake. 
 
 25 And he builded an altar there, 
 and called upon the name of the Lor, 
 and pitched his tent there: and there 
 Isaac’s servants digged a well. 
 
 26 { Then Abimelech went to him 
 from Gerar, and Ahuzzath one of his 
 friends, and Phichol the chief captain 
 of his army. 
 
 27 And Isaac said unto them, 
 Wherefore come ye to me, seeing ye 
 hate me, and have sent me away from 
 
 ou? 
 
 28 And they said, 'We saw cer- 
 tainly that the Lorp was with thee: 
 and we said, Let there be now an oath 
 betwixt us, even betwixt us and thee, 
 and let us make a covenant with thee; 
 
 ets 
 as ee have not touched thee, and as 
 we have done unto thee nothing but 
 good, and have sent thee away in 
 peace: thou art now the blessed of 
 the Lorp. 
 
 now filled up, twelve feet in diameter, and 
 regularly built with hewn stone (Robinson, 
 ‘Phys, Geog.’ p. 243; see also ‘ B, R.’ p. 2.89). 
 
 26, Phichol| See onv.1. ‘The name sig- 
 nifies ‘the mouth of all,” which would be 
 applicable to a grand vizier, through whom 
 all might have access to the sovereign, or to a 
 general whose voice gave command to all. 
 The former sense would seem the more pro- 
 bable, if it had not been said that Phichol was 
 «‘the chief captain of the army.” 
 
 29. thou art now the blessed of the 
 Lorv] We have here twice (see Vv. 28) the 
 sacred name -JEHOVAH, used by the heathen 
 king of Gerar, This does not, however, in- 
 dicate that the writer of this portion of the 
 
 159 
 
 + Heb. 
 Seeing we 
 SAW, 
 
 t’That thou wilt do us no hurt, t Heb. 
 Lf thou 
 shalt, &¢. 
 
ae - GENESIS: XXVL XXVIII. ee 
 
 30 And he made them a feast, and 
 they did eat and drink. 
 
 31 And they rose up betimes in 
 the morning, and sware one to an- 
 other: and Isaac sent them away, and 
 they departed from him in peace. 
 
 32 And it came to pass the same 
 day, that Isaac’s servants came, and 
 told him concerning the well which 
 they had digged, and said unto him, 
 We have found water. 
 
 I That is, 33 And he called it 'Shebah: there- 
 
 iaeati, fore the name of the city is 'Beer- 
 the well of sheba unto this day. 
 
 ‘34 4 And Esau was forty years 
 
 old when he took to wife Judith the 
 
 history had so-called Jehovistic tendencies, 
 or that he simply identified the name JEHO- 
 VAH with the name Elohim, Abraham had 
 dwelt for some time in Gerar, either under 
 this very Abimelech, or under his immediate 
 predecessor, Abraham was known as a wor- 
 shipper of JEHOVAH, and was seen to be 
 blessed and prospered by his God. Now 
 again Abraham’s son Isaac comes and so- 
 journs for a long time in the same country. 
 He too worships his father’s God, and is 
 seen, like his father, to prosper abundantly. 
 The Philistines therefore recognize him, as 
 his father, to be a worshipper of JEHOVAH, 
 and perceive that he has succeeded to his fa- 
 ther in the favour of their great Protector, 
 Abimelech does not profess himself a wor- 
 shipper of the Lorp, but looks on the Lorp 
 as the God of Abraham, and sees that Abra- 
 ham’s son Isaac is ‘‘ oa the blessed of the 
 Lorp,” 
 
 33. he called it Shebah: therefore the 
 name of the city is Beer-sheba unto this day] 
 ‘¢Shebah” means both seven and oath; the 
 number seven being a sacred number among 
 the Hebrews, and oaths being apparently 
 ratified with presents or sacrifices seven in 
 number (see ch, xxi. 28), There is no in- 
 consistency in the history which tells us that 
 Abraham gave the name of Beer-sheba to this 
 well long before, and under similar circum- 
 stances, ‘The well, dug by Abraham, and 
 secured to him by oath, had been covered 
 and lost. It is found by Isaac’s servants just 
 after the covenant made between him and 
 Abimelech. ‘The whole series of events re- 
 calls to Isaac’s mind the original name, and 
 that which gave rise to the name, and so he 
 restores, not the well only, but the name 
 also. ‘‘Upon the Northern side of the Wady 
 es-Seba are the two deep and ancient wells, 
 which gave occasion to this name” (Robin- 
 Sons) ate hys, quscor wD. 2A920 6B, RA! 9; p, 
 
 daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and 
 Bashemath the daughter of Elon the 
 Hittite: 
 
 35 Which ‘were ta grief of mind‘ chap. 27, 
 
 unto Isaac and to Rebekah. ' Heb, 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. of spirit. 
 
 1 Isaac sendeth Esau for venison. 6 Rebekah 
 instructeth Jacob to obtain the blessing. 15 
 Facob under the person of Esau obtaineth it, 
 30 Esau bringeth venison. 33 L[saac trembleth. 
 34 Esau complaineth, and by importunity ob- 
 taineth a blessing. 41 He threateneth Facob. 
 42 Rebekah disappointeth it. 
 
 ND it came to pass, that when 
 Isaac was old, and his eyes were 
 
 dim, so that he could not see, he 
 called Esau his eldest .son, and said 
 
 300). It is supposed by Robinson, that the 
 one is that dug by Abraham, the other that 
 dug by Isaac, the name having been after- 
 wards given to both, 
 
 34, Esau was forty years old, &c.| Isaac 
 was now a hundred years old, Esau mar- 
 ries two wives and both of them Canaanites, 
 On account of his polygamy and his mar- 
 rying without consent of his parents from 
 among the idolatrous Hittites and Hivites 
 (see ch, xxxvi. 2), he is called ‘a fornicator” 
 by the Apostle (Heb. xii, 16), These two 
 verses do not belong so much to this chapter 
 as to the next. ‘The account of Esau’s mar- 
 riage, and the consequent grief of Isaac and 
 Rebekah, is intended to prepare the way for 
 the succeeding history, 
 
 35. a grief of mind| A bitterness of 
 spirit. 
 
 Cuap, XXVIII, 1. Isaac was old| The 
 Jewish intepreters say he was now one hun- 
 dred and thirty-seven years old, the age at 
 which Ishmael died fourteen years before, 
 and it is not improbable that the thought of 
 his brother’s death at this age put Isaac in 
 mind of his own end, ‘The calculation on 
 which it is inferred that Isaac was one hun- 
 dred and thirty-seven, Esau and Jacob being 
 seventy-seven at this time, is as follows; 
 Joseph was thirty years old when he stood 
 before Pharaoh (Gen, xli. 46), then came 
 seven years of plenty (v.47—53), which made 
 Joseph thirty-seven; then two years of 
 famine ere Jacob came into Egypt (ch. xlv. 
 6), which brings Joseph’s age to thirty-nine; 
 but at this time Jacob was one hundred and 
 thirty; therefore Jacob must have been nine- 
 ty-one when Joseph was born, Now Joseph 
 was born in the last year of the second seven, 
 or in the fourteenth year of Jacob’s service 
 with Laban, at the very end of that year 
 
Heb. 
 
 unt, 
 
 v, 2—8.] 
 
 unto him, My son: and he said unto 
 him, Behold, here am I. 
 
 2, And he said, Behold now, I am 
 old, I know not the day of my 
 death: : 
 
 . 3 Now therefore take, I pray thee, 
 thy weapons, thy quiver and thy bow, 
 and go out to the field, and ‘take me 
 some venison ; 
 
 _ 4 And make me savoury meat, such 
 as I love, and bring zt to me, that I 
 may eat; that my soul may bless thee 
 
 GIIVEATS IX VIN 
 
 5 And Rebekah heard when Isaac 
 spake to Esau his son. And Esau 
 went to the field to hunt for venison, 
 and to bring zt. 
 
 6 { And Rebekah spake unto Ja- 
 cob her son, saying, Behold, I heard 
 thy father speak unto Esau thy brother, 
 saying, . 
 
 7 Bring me venison, and make me 
 savoury meat, that 1 may eat, and 
 bless thee before the Lorp before my 
 death. 
 
 8 Now therefore, my son, obey my 
 
 before I die. 
 
 (ch. xxx. 25, 26). Take fourteen years out 
 of ninety-one, Jacob’s age when Joseph was 
 born, and we have seventy-seven for the age 
 of Jacob, when he was sent away from the 
 wrath of Esau to the house of Laban, (See 
 Lightfoot’s ‘Harmony of Old Testament’ in 
 loc., works by Pitman, 1822, Vol. 11. pp. 96, 
 97). If this calculation be true, Isaac had 
 still forty-three years to live, his quiet life 
 having been extended to an unusual length. 
 ‘There is however great risk of numerical cal- 
 culations from various causes being inexact. 
 The last chapter had brought us down only 
 to the hundredth year of Isaac’s life, Esau 
 being then but forty; and in some respects 
 an earlier date seems more accordant with 
 the tenor of the subsequent history, it being 
 hardly probable that Jacob should have been 
 seventy-seven when he fled to Laban and 
 served seven years for his wife, and then 
 another seven years for his second wife; even 
 at a period when human life was still ex- 
 tended so far beyond that of future genera- 
 tions, On the chronology of Jacob’s life see 
 note at the end of ch, xxxi. 
 
 3. quiver| So LXX., Vulg., Pseudo- 
 Jon,: but Onkelos, Syr, have ‘‘sword,” The 
 Jewish commentators are divided between 
 the two senses, ‘The word occurs nowhere 
 else, but is derived from a verb meaning to 
 ‘thang,” to ‘‘suspend,” which would suit 
 either the quiver which hung over the 
 shoulder, or the sword, the ‘‘hanger,” which 
 was suspended by the side. 
 
 4, that my soul may bless thee] There 
 appears a singular mixture of the carnal and 
 the spiritual in this, Isaac recognizes his 
 own character as that of the priestly and 
 prophetic head of his house, privileged to 
 bless as father and priest, and to foretell the 
 fortunes of his family in succession to Abra- 
 ham in his office of the prophet of God. 
 Yet his carnal affection causes him to forget 
 the response to the enquiry of Rebekah, ‘‘the 
 elder shall serve the younger,” and the fact 
 that Esau had sold his birthright and alienated 
 
 ArOL. 1. 
 
 it from him for ever by a solemn oath. 
 Moreover, in order that his heart may be the 
 more warmed to him whom he desires to 
 bless, he seeks to have some of that savoury 
 meat brought to him which he loved. 
 
 6. Rebekah spake unto Jacob] She had 
 no doubt treasured up the oracle which had 
 assured her, even before their birth, that her 
 younger son Jacob, whom she loved, should 
 bear rule over Esau, whose wild and reckless 
 life, and whose Canaanitish wives had been a 
 ‘‘bitterness of soul” to her. She probably 
 knew that Jacob had bought Esau’s birth- 
 right. Now, believing rightly that the father’s 
 benediction would surely bring blessing with 
 it, she fears that these promises and hopes 
 would fail. She believed, but not with that 
 faith, which can patiently abide till God 
 works out His plans by His Providence, So 
 she strove, as it were, to force forward the 
 event by unlawful means; even, as some have 
 thought that Judas betrayed Christ that he 
 might force Him to declare Himself a king 
 and to take the kingdom, Every character 
 in this remarkable history comes in for some 
 share of blame, and yet some share of praise. 
 
 Isaac, with the dignity of the ancient patriarch 
 
 and faith in the inspiring Spirit of God, 
 prepares to bless his son, but he lets carnal 
 and worldly motives weigh with him. Re- 
 bekah and Jacob, seeing the promises afar 
 off and desiring the spiritual blessings, yet 
 practise deceit and fraud to obtain them, 
 instead of waiting till He who promised 
 should shew Himself faithful. Esau, de- 
 frauded of what seems his right, exhibits a 
 natural feeling of sorrow and indignation, 
 which excites our pity and sympathy; but we 
 have to remember how ‘for a morsel of 
 meat he sold his birthright,” and that so, 
 when he would have inherited the promises 
 he was rejected, being set forth as an example 
 of the unavailing regret of such as wantonly 
 despise spiritual privileges, and when they 
 have lost them, seek too late for the blessings 
 to which they lead, 
 L 
 
 {61 
 
162 
 
 t Heb. 
 
 adestrable. 
 
 voice according to that which I com- 
 mand thee. 
 
 _ g Go now to the flock, and fetch 
 me from thence two good kids of the 
 goats; and I will make them savoury 
 meat for thy father, such as he loveth; 
 
 10 And thou shalt bring zt to thy 
 father, that he may eat, and that he 
 may -bless thee before his death. 
 
 11 And Jacob said to Rebekah his 
 mother, Behold, Esau my brother ¢s 
 a hairy man, and I am a smooth man: 
 
 12 My father peradventure will feel 
 me, and [ shall seem to him as a de- 
 ceiver; and I shall bring a curse upon 
 me, and not a blessing. 
 
 13 And his mother said unto him, 
 Upon me de thy curse, my son: only 
 obey my voice, and go fetch me them. 
 
 14, And he went, and fetched, and 
 brought them to his mother: and his 
 mother made savoury meat, such as 
 his father loved. 
 
 15 And Rebekah took ' goodly rai- 
 ment of her eldest son Esau, which 
 were with her in the house, and put 
 them upon Jacob her younger son: 
 
 16 And she put the skins of the 
 kids of the goats upon his hands, and 
 upon the smooth of his neck: 
 
 15. goodly raiment of her elder son Esau] 
 St Jerome (‘Qu. Hebr,’ in loc.) mentions 
 it as a tradition of the rabbins, that the 
 firstborn in the patriarchal times, holding 
 the office of priesthood, had a sacerdotal 
 vestment in which they offered sacrifice; and 
 it was this sacerdotal vestment which was 
 kept by Rebekah for Esau, and which was 
 now put upon Jacob, See on ch. xxxvii. 3. 
 
 16. the skins of the kids of the goats] 
 Martial (Lib. x11. Epig. 46) alludes to kid 
 skins as used by the Romans for false hair to 
 conceal baldness, The wool of the oriental 
 goats is much longer and finer than of those of 
 this country. (Cp. Cant. iv, 1. See Bochart, 
 ‘Hieroz.’ p.1, Lib, 11. c. 51, See also Rosenm., 
 Tuch, &c.) 
 
 18. who art thou, my son?] ‘The anxiety 
 and trepidation of Isaac appear in these 
 words, He had perhaps some misgiving as 
 to the blessing of Esau, and doubted whe- 
 ther God would prosper him in the chase 
 and bring him home with venison to his 
 father, 
 
 GENESTS: pxX20V 1D 
 
 [v. 9—24. 
 
 17 And she gave the savoury meat 
 and the bread, which she had prepared, 
 into the hand of her son Jacob. 
 
 18 { And he came unto his father, 
 and said, My father: and he said, 
 Here am 1; who art thou, my son? 
 
 19 And Jacob said unto his father, 
 I am Esau thy firstborn; I have done 
 according as thou badest me: arise, I 
 pray thee, sit and eat of my venison, 
 that thy soul may bless me. 
 
 20 And Isaac said unto his son, 
 How is zt that thou hast found i¢ so 
 quickly, my son? And he said, Be- 
 cause the Lorp thy God brought ## 
 ‘to me. 
 
 21 And Isaac said unto Jacob, 
 Come near, I pray thee, that I may 
 feel thee, my son, whether thou de 
 my very son Esau or not, 
 
 22 And Jacob went near unto Isaac 
 his father; and he felt him, and said, 
 The voice is Jacob’s voice, but the 
 hands are the hands of Esau. 
 
 23 And he discerned him not, be- 
 cause his hands were hairy, as his 
 brother Esau’s hands: so he blessed 
 him. 7 
 
 24 And he said, 4rt thou my very 
 son Esau? And he said, I am. 
 
 20. Because the Lorp thy God brought it 
 to me] ‘The covering of his falsehood with 
 this appeal to the Most High is the worst 
 part of Jacob’s conduct. In the use of the 
 names of God, Jacob speaks of JEHOVAH as 
 the God of his father, A little further on in 
 the history, Jacob vows that, if he is pro- 
 spered in his journey, then JEHOVAH shall be 
 his God (ch. xxvili, 21), This is exactly 
 accordant with the general use of these sacred 
 names, Elohism would, so to speak, corre- 
 spond with our word Theism, ‘Though Ja- 
 cob was a believer in JEHOVAH, yet revela- 
 tion in those early days was but slight, and 
 the knowledge of the patriarchs imperfect. 
 There were gods of nations round about. 
 JEHOVAH had revealed Himself to Abraham 
 and was Abraham’s God, and again to Isaac, 
 and Isaac had served Him as his God, It is 
 quite possible that Esau, with his heathen 
 wives, may have been but a half worshipper 
 of JEHOVAH; but Jacob recognizes Him as 
 the God of his father Isaac (cp. ch. xxxi. 53), 
 and afterwards solemnly chooses Him as the 
 object of his own worship and service, See 
 however note on ch, xxviii, 2, . 
 
 t Heb. 
 before mute, 
 
y.-25—37.] Gi Nola Xe LT, 162 
 
 25 And he said, Bring zt near to 
 me, and I will eat of my son’s veni- 
 son, that my soul may bless thee. 
 And he brought 7 near to him, and 
 he did eat: and he brought him wine, 
 and he drank. 
 
 26 And his father Isaac said unto 
 
 him, Come near now, and kiss me, 
 my son. 
 _ 27 And he came near, and kissed 
 him; and he smelled the smell of his 
 raiment, and blessed him, and said, 
 See, the smell of my son zs as the 
 smell of a field which the Lorp 
 hath blessed: 
 
 ‘Heb. x1, 28 Therefore “God give thee of 
 
 the dew of heaven, and the fatness of 
 the earth, and plenty of corn and 
 wine; 
 
 _ 29 Let people serve thee, and na- 
 tions bow down to thee: be lord over 
 thy brethren, and let thy mother’s 
 sons bow down to thee: cursed be 
 every one that curseth thee, and 
 blessed be he that blesseth thee. 
 
 30 4 And it came to pass, as soon 
 as Isaac had made an end of blessing 
 Jacob, and Jacob was yet scarce gone 
 
 _out from the presence of Isaac his 
 father, that Esau his brother came in 
 from his hunting. 
 
 31 And he also had made savoury 
 meat, and brought it unto his father, 
 and said unto his father, Let my fa- 
 ther arise, and eat of his son’s venison, 
 that thy soul may bless me. 
 
 32 And Isaac his father said unto 
 him, Who art thou? And he said, I 
 am thy son, thy firstborn Esau, 
 
 33 And Isaac ‘trembled very ex- Heb. 
 ceedingly, and said, Who? where zs abe 
 he that hath ‘taken venison, and £74. 
 brought zt me, and I have eaten of greatly. 
 all before thou camest, and have bless= punted. 
 ed him? yea, and he shall be blessed. 
 
 34. And when Esau heard the words 
 of his father, he cried with a great and 
 exceeding bitter cry, and said unto his . 
 father, Bless me, even me also, O my 
 father. 
 
 35 And he said, Thy brother came 
 with subtilty, and hath taken away 
 thy blessing. 
 
 36 And he said, Is not he rightly 
 named ' Jacob? for he hath supplant- !Thatis, « 
 ed me these two times: he took away 20” 
 my birthright; and, behold, now he 
 hath taken away my blessing, And 
 he said, Hast thou not reserved a 
 blessing for me? 
 
 37 And Isaac answered and said 
 unto Esau, Behold, I have made him 
 
 26, kiss me| ‘uch has suggested that 
 Isaac asked his son to kiss him, that he 
 might distinguish the shepherd who would 
 smell of the flock from the huntsman who 
 would smell of the field. It may have been 
 so (see next verse), or it may have only been 
 paternal love. 
 
 28. God] Lit. The God, i.e. that God 
 just named, the God of thy Father, viz. 
 JEHOVAH. It does not indicate (as Keil) 
 ‘‘the personal God,” nor is it (as some would 
 have it) a Jehovistic formula. ‘The article is 
 perfectly natural as referring to Jacob's 
 words v. 20. ‘The blessing is, as usual, 
 thrown into the poetic form of an anti- 
 strophic parallelism. 
 
 29. Let people serve thee, and nations bow 
 down to thee| ‘This was fulfilled in the 
 extensive dominions -of the descendants of 
 Jacob under David and Solomon, but, no 
 doubt, has a fuller reference to the time when 
 ‘‘the Lorp should arise upon Israel, and His 
 glory should be seen on her, when Gentiles 
 should come to her light, and kings to the 
 
 brightness of her rising”... when ‘‘the abundance 
 of the sea should be converted unto her, the 
 forces of the Gentiles should come unto 
 her” (Isa, Ix. 5, 6. Cp. Rom. xi. 25). 
 
 29. cursed be every one, &c.] This is 
 the continued promise to the chosen race, first 
 given (Gen, xii, 3) to Abraham, It is ob- 
 served, however, that Isaac does not pronounce 
 on Jacobthat emphatic spiritual blessing, which 
 God Himself had assured to Abraham twice 
 (xii, 3; xxii. 18), and to Isaac once (xxVi. 4), 
 ‘In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth 
 be blessed.” ‘There was something carnal and 
 sinful in the whole conduct of the persons 
 concerned in the history of this chapter, Isaac, 
 Rebekah, Jacob, Esau: and it may have been 
 this which withheld for the time the bright- 
 est promise to the family of Abraham; or 
 perhaps it may have been that that promise 
 should come only from the mouth of God Him- 
 self, as it is given afterwards in ch, xxvull, 14. 
 
 36, Is not he rightly named Jacob?] Lit. 
 ‘6Is it that he is called Jacob, and he sup- 
 planteth or outwitteth me these two times?” 
 | L2 
 
164 
 
 thy lord, and all his brethren have I 
 
 given to him for servants; and with 
 
 neibas 7 com and wine have I 'sustained him: 
 ‘and what shall I do now unto thee, 
 my son? 
 
 38 And Esau said unto his father, 
 Hast thou but one blessing, my fa- 
 ther? bless me, even me also, O my 
 father. And Esau lifted up his voice, 
 
 6 Heb. 12. 2and wept. 
 HP 39 And Isaac his father answered 
 «ver. 28. and said unto him, Behold, “thy dwell- 
 ae Ved. ing shall be 'the fatness of the earth, 
 
 71SS. 
 
 and of the dew of heaven from above; 
 40 And by thy sword shalt thou 
 live, and shalt serve thy brother; and 
 it shall come to pass when thou shalt 
 have the dominion, that thou shalt 
 break his yoke from off thy neck. 
 ‘ 41 4 And Esau hated Jacob be- 
 cause of the blessing wherewith his 
 
 GENESIS: 1xoeVvai; 
 
 [v. 38 —45. 
 
 father blessed him: and Esau said in 
 his heart, ‘he days of mourning for 
 
 my father are at hand; ¢then will [ 7d 
 
 slay my brother Jacob. 
 
 42. And these words of Esau her 
 elder son were told to Rebekah: and 
 she sent and called Jacob her younger 
 son, and said unto him, Behold, thy 
 brother Esau, as touching thee, doth 
 comfort himself, purposing to kill thee. 
 
 43 Now therefore, my son, obey 
 my voice; and arise, flee thou to 
 Laban my brother to Haran; 
 
 44 And tarry with him a few days, 
 until thy brother’s fury turn away ; 
 
 45 Until thy brother’s anger turn » 
 away from thee, and he forget that 
 which thou hast done to him: then I 
 will send, and fetch thee from thence: 
 why should I be deprived also of you 
 both in one day? | 
 
 A paronomasia on the name Jacob, See on 
 ch. xxv. 26. The words seem to mean, Is 
 there not a connection between the meaning 
 of his name Jacob, and the fact that he thus 
 supplants or outwits me? 
 
 39. thy dwelling shall be the fatness of 
 the earth, and of the dew of heaven from 
 above] Lit. ‘‘from the fatness of the earth 
 and from the dew of heaven.” Castalio, Le 
 Clerc, Knobel, Del., Keil, render the prepo- 
 sition ‘‘from” by ‘far from.” So apparently 
 
 _Gesenius (‘Thes,’ p. 805, absque, sine). But 
 
 the Authorized Version corresponds with the 
 ancient versions, ‘The very same words with 
 the very same preposition occur in v. 28, and 
 it is difficult to make that preposition parti- 
 tive in v, 28, and privative in v. 39. 
 
 40. by thy sword thou shalt live, and 
 shalt serve thy brother, &c.} Josephus (‘B. J.’ 
 Iv. 4. 1) describes the Edomites as a tu- 
 multuous, disorderly race, and all their history 
 seems to confirm the truth of this description, 
 The prophecy thus delivered by Isaac was 
 fulfilled in every particular. At first Esau, 
 the elder, seemed to prosper more than his 
 brother Jacob, There were dukes in Edom 
 before there reigned any king over the chil- 
 dren of Israel (Gen, xxxvi. 31); and whilst 
 Israel was in bondage in Egypt, Edom was an 
 independent people. But Saul defeated and 
 David conquered the Edomites (1 S. xiv. 47; 
 2 S. viii. 14), and they were, notwithstand- 
 ing some revolts, constantly subject to Judah 
 (see 1 K. xi. 14; 2K. xiv.7, 22; 2 Chr, xxv, 
 II; xxvi. 2) till the reign of Ahaz, when they 
 threw off the yoke (2 K. xvi, 6; 2 Chr, xxviii, 
 
 7). Judas Maccabeus defeated them fre- 
 quently (1 Macc, v.; 2 Macc, x.), At last 
 his nephew Hyrcanus completely conquered 
 them, and compelled them to be circumcised, 
 and incorporated them into the Jewish nation 
 (Joseph, ‘Ant,’ x11, 9. 1); though finally 
 under Antipater and Herod they established 
 an Idumzan dynasty, which continued till the 
 destruction of the Jewish polity. 
 
 when thou shalt have dominion] More pro- 
 bably when thou shalt toss (the yoke), 
 So the LXX., Vulg. (excutias) ; Gesen, ‘'Thes,’ 
 p. 1269; Hengst., Keil, &c, ‘The allusion is 
 to the restlessness of the fierce Edomite under 
 the yoke of the Jewish dominion. ‘The pro- 
 phecy was fulfilled when they revolted under 
 Joram and again under Ahaz; and _ finally 
 when they gave a race of rulers to Judea in 
 the persons of Herod and his sons (see last 
 note), 
 
 43. Haran] It appears that not only A- 
 braham and the family of his brother Haran 
 must have left Ur of the Chaldees (see ch. xi. 
 31); but that the family of Nahor must have 
 followed them to Haran, which is therefore 
 called ‘‘the city of Nahor” (ch, xxiv. To). 
 The name Harran still remains in the centre 
 of the cultivated district at the foot of the 
 hills lying between the Khabour and the Eu- 
 phrates, 
 
 45. why should I be deprived also of you 
 both in one day?] i.e, of Jacob by the hand of 
 Esau, and of Esau by the hand of justice (ch, 
 ix. 6), The sacred history has shewn us the 
 sins and errors of the family of Isaac; it here 
 briefly but emphatically exhibits the distress 
 
v. 46—11.] GENESIS, AXVITS AXVITI, 
 
 46 And Rebekah said to Isaac, «I 
 am weary of my life because of the 
 daughters of Heth: if Jacob take a 
 wife of the daughters of Heth, such 
 as these which are of the daughters of 
 the land, what good shall my life 
 do me? 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 1 Jsaac blesseth Facob, and sendeth him to Padan- 
 aram. 6 Esau marrieth Mahalath the daugh- 
 ter of Ishmael. 10 The vision of Facob’s 
 ladder. 18 The stone of Beth-el, 20 Facol’s 
 vow. 
 
 : D Isaac called Jacob, and bless- 
 
 | ed him, and charged him, and 
 
 said unto him, Thou shalt not take a 
 
 wife of the daughters of Canaan. 
 
 2, “Arise, go to Padan-aram, to 
 the house of Bethuel thy mother’s 
 father; and take thee a wife from 
 thence of the daughters of Laban thy 
 mother’s brother. 
 
 3 And God Almighty bless thee, 
 and make thee fruitful, and multiply 
 
 165 
 
 i a 
 
 ‘chap. 26. the land ‘wherein thou art a stranger, t Heb. 
 which God gave unto Abraham. pated hy 
 5 And Isaac sent away Jacob: Be 
 and he went to Padan-aram unto 
 Laban, son of Bethuel the Syrian, 
 the brother of Rebekah, Jacob’s and 
 Esau’s mother. 
 6 { When Esau saw that Isaac 
 had blessed Jacob, and sent him away 
 to Padan-aram, to take him a wife 
 from thence; and that as he blessed 
 him he gave him a charge, saying, 
 Thou shalt not take a wife of the 
 daughters of Canaan ; 
 7 And that Jacob obeyed his father 
 and his mother, and was gone to 
 Padan-aram ; 
 8 And Esau seeing that the daugh- 
 ters of Canaan t pleased not Isaac his * He. 
 father ; in the 
 Then went Esau unto Ishmael, 7° °* 
 and took unto the wives which he 
 had Mahalath the daughter of Ish- 
 mael Abraham’s son, the sister of 
 
 « Hos. 12. 
 12, 
 
 ‘Heb. thee, that thou mayest be ta multi- Nebajoth, to be his wife. 
 
 aN ASSEM= 
 
 bly of tude of people; 10 @ And Jacob went out from 
 cople. 
 
 4 And give thee the blessing of 
 Abraham, to thee, and to thy seed 
 
 Beer-sheba, and went toward ? Haran. meee 
 
 1r And he lighted upon a certain Charran. 
 
 with thee; that thou mayest inherit 
 
 and misery which at once followed; Isaac 
 and Rebekah left in their old age by both 
 their children; idols become scourges; , Fsau 
 disappointed and disinherited; Jacob banished 
 from his home, destined to a long servitude 
 and a life of disquietude and suffering. Even 
 those, whom God chooses and honours, can- 
 not sin against Him without reaping, at least 
 in this world, the fruit of evil doings (1 Cor, 
 xi, 32), 
 
 Cuap, XXVIII. 1. Isaac called Jacob, 
 and blessed him] Isaac has learned that God 
 had decreed that Jacob should be the heir 
 of the promises, the recipient of the blessings. 
 Accordingly, in v. 4, he invokes on Jacob 
 ‘the blessing of Abraham,” that ‘‘he and his 
 seed should inherit the land of his sojourning,” 
 and no doubt also the spiritual blessings pro- 
 nounced on the descendants of Abraham, 
 
 2. Padan-aram| See on xxiv, Io, XXv, 
 20, XXVIl, 43. 
 
 Bethuel| ‘This looks as if Bethuel were still 
 living, not as the Jewish tradition says, that 
 he died before Isaac’s marriage. It is more 
 likely that he was either naturally of weak 
 
 place, and tarried there all night, 
 
 en eaaeameananemamaianriaamiaaean ae 
 
 character, or enfeebled by age, (See on ch, 
 Xxiv, 50.) 
 
 3. God Almighty] ‘‘El-Shaddai.” It was 
 under this name that God appeared to Abra~ 
 ham, ch, xvii, 1, and gave him the blessing to 
 which Isaac now refers, 
 
 4, the land wherein thou art a stranger] 
 Lit. the land of thy sojournings, 
 
 8. pleased not] Lit, were evil in the 
 eyes of. 
 
 11. he lighted upon a certain place| Lit, he 
 lighted on the place, ‘The definite 
 article probably indicates either that it was the 
 place appointed by God, or that it was the 
 place afterwards so famous from God's reve- 
 lation to Jacob, We may well picture to our- 
 selves the feelings of Jacob on this night, a 
 solitary wanderer from his father’s house, 
 going back from the land of promise, con- 
 
 ‘scious of sin and in the midst of danger, with 
 
 a dark and doubtful future before him, yet 
 hitherto having always cherished the hope of 
 being the chosen of God to bear the honours 
 and privileges of his house, to have the inherit- 
 ance promised to Abraham, and now too with 
 
166 
 
 ¢ chap. 33 
 
 rT. 
 Sido. s 
 
 20. 
 
 because the sun was set; and he 
 took of the stones of that place, and 
 put them for his pillows, and lay down 
 in that place to sleep. 
 
 12 And he dreamed, and behold a 
 ladder set up on the earth, and the 
 top of it reached to heaven: and be- 
 hold the angels of God ascending and 
 descending on it. 
 
 13 “And, behold, the Lorn stood 
 above it, and said, I am the Lorp 
 God of Abraham thy father, and the 
 God of Isaac: the land whereon thou 
 liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy 
 seed ; 
 
 14, And thy seed shall be as the 
 
 the east, and to the north, and to the 
 
 GENESIS: 
 
 ee RSE, 
 
 15 And, behold, I am with thee, - 
 and will keep thee in all places whi- 
 ther thou goest, and will bring thee 
 again into this land; for I will not 
 leave thee, until I have done that 
 which I have spoken to thee of. 
 
 16 { And Jacob awaked out of his 
 sleep, and he said, Surely the Lorp is 
 in this place; and I knew 7t not. 
 
 17 And he was afraid, and said, 
 How dreadful zs this place! this zs 
 none other but the house of God, 
 and this zs the gate of heaven. 
 
 18 And Jacob rose up early in the 
 morning, and took the stone that he 
 had put for his pillows, and set it up 
 
 [v. 12—20. 
 
 +Heb. dust of the earth, and thou shalt /or a pillar, and poured oil upon the 
 eter’ tspread abroad “to the west, and to top of it. 
 @ Deut. r2. 1g And he called the name of that 
 
 place ' Beth-el: but the name of that ' Thatis, 
 
 échap. 12. south: and in thee and ¢in thy seed the house 
 city was called Luz at the first. 
 
 of God. 
 
 & 13.18, shall all the families of the earth be 
 
 & 22. 18. 
 & 26. 4. 
 
 blessed. 
 
 the words of Isaac’s blessing just ringing in 
 his ears. Whether would fear or faith prevail ? 
 
 12. a ladder| God takes this opportu- 
 nity to impress Jacob more deeply with the 
 sense of His presence, to encourage him with 
 promises of protection and to reveal to him 
 His purpose of mercy and love. 
 
 The ladder might only indicate that there 
 
 ~ ‘was a way from God to man, and that man 
 
 might by God’s help mount up by it to hea- 
 ven, that angels went up from man to God, 
 and came down from God to man, and that 
 there was a continual providence watching 
 over the servants of God, So the dream would 
 teach and comfort the heart of the dreamer, 
 But we cannot doubt, that there was a deeper 
 meaning in the vision thus vouchsafed to the 
 heir of the promises, in the hour of his greatest 
 desolation, and when. the sense of sin must 
 have been most heavy on his soul. Our Lord 
 Himself teaches (John i, 51), that the ladder 
 signified the Son of Man, Him, who was now 
 afresh promised as to be of the Seed of Jacob 
 (v. 14); Him, by whom alone we go to God 
 (John xiv. 6); who is the way to heaven, and 
 who has now gone there to prepare a place 
 
 for us, 
 
 13. the Loxp stood above it] Onkelos 
 renders ‘‘the glory of the Lorp,” 
 
 16, Surely the Lorp is in this place] It 
 is possible that Jacob may not have had quite 
 so intelligent a conviction of God’s omnipre- 
 sence as Christians have; but it is apparent 
 throughout the patriarchal history that special 
 sanctity was attached to special places, This 
 
 20 And Jacob vowed a vow, say- 
 
 feeling is encouraged by the highest sanction 
 In eKits 
 
 18, set it up for a pillar, and poured oil 
 upon the top of it| ‘This was probably the most 
 ancient and simplest form of temple or place 
 for religious worship; excepting the altar of 
 stones or earth fora burnt sacrifice, Whether 
 this is the first example of such an erection we” 
 cannot judge, It was a very natural and ob- 
 vious way of marking the sanctity of a spot; 
 as in Christian times wayside crosses and 
 the like have been set up so frequently. ‘The 
 pouring oil on it was a significant rite, though 
 what may have been the full significance to 
 Jacob’s mind it is not easy to say,. St Augus- 
 tine (‘De C, D.’ xvi. 38) says that it was 
 not that he might sacrifice to the stone or wor- 
 ship it, but that as Christ is named from chrism, 
 or unction, so there was a great mystery (sa= 
 cramentum) in this anointing of the stone with 
 oil, ‘The constant connection in religious 
 thought between unction and _ sanctification 
 seems a more probable solution of the ques- 
 tion, 
 
 19. Beth-el]| Abraham had built an altar 
 in this neighbourhood (xii. 8, xiii, 4); and 
 it is possible that the spot thus sanctified 
 may have been the very place which Jacob 
 lighted on (v, 11), and which he found to be 
 
 ‘the house of God and the gate of heaven, 
 
 The place consecrated perhaps first by 
 Abraham’s altar, and afterwards by Jacob's 
 vision and pillar, was plainly distinct from the 
 city which was ‘called Luz at the first,” and 
 which afterwards received the name of Bethel 
 
GENESIS.“ XXVITI XXIX. 
 
 ing, If God will be with me, and 
 will keep me in this way that I go, 
 and will give me bread to eat, and 
 raiment to put on, 
 
 21 So that I come again to my 
 father’s house in peace; then shall the 
 
 Lorp be my God: 
 
 Vv. 2I—3.| 167 
 entertaineth him. 18 Jacob covenanteth for 
 Rachel, 23 Heis deceived with Leah. 28 He 
 marrieth also Rachel, and serveth for her 
 seven years more. 32 Leah beareth Reuben, 
 
 33 Simeon, 34 Levi, 35 and Fudah, 
 
 HEN Jacob went on his jour- }Heb. 
 Fs ft up his 
 ney, and came into the land of 
 
 eet. 
 the ‘ people of the east. t Heb. 
 
 children. 
 
 22 And this stone,. which I have 
 set for a pillar, shall be God’s house: 
 and of all that thou shalt give me I| 
 will surely give the tenth unto thee. 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX, 
 
 1 Facob ‘cometh to the well of Haran. 9 He 
 taketh acquaintance of Rachel. 13 Laban 
 
 from its proximity to the sanctuary. So late 
 as the time of Joshua (see Josh, xvi. 1, 2) the 
 two places were distinct. When the tribe of 
 Joseph took the city (Judg. 1. 2126), they 
 appear to have given to the city the name of 
 Bethel, formerly attaching only to the sanc- 
 tuary, and thenceforward, the name Luz 
 having been transferred to another town, the 
 old town of Luz is always called Bethel. 
 According to Eusebius and Jerome (‘ Ono- 
 mast,’ art. Bai67d) it lay about twelve miles 
 from Jerusalem on the road to Sichem, Its 
 ruins are still called by the name of Beitin. 
 ‘The rocky character of the hills around, and 
 the stony nature of the soil, have been much 
 noted by travellers (see Robinson, ‘B. R.’ 1, 
 pp. 127—-130, and Stanley, ‘Sinai and Pales- 
 tine,’ pp. 217—223). It has been thought by 
 many that this act of Jacob, in setting up a 
 stone to mark a sacred spot, was the origin of 
 Cromlechs and all sacred stones, Certainly 
 we find in later ages the custom of having 
 stones, and those too anointed with oil, as 
 objects of idolatrous worship. Clem, Alex. 
 (‘ Stromat.’ Lib, vit, p. 713) speaks of ‘* wor- 
 shipping every oily stone,” and Arnobius, 
 (‘ Ady. Gentes,’ Lib, I, 39), in like manner, 
 refers to the worshipping of ‘‘a stone smeared 
 with oil, as though there were in it a present 
 “power.” It has been conjectured farther that the 
 name Bztulia, given to stones, called animated 
 stones (Ai@ot éuwvyxor), by the Phcenicians 
 (Euseb, ‘Prep, Evang.’ I. 10) was derived 
 from this name of Bethel. (See Spencer, ‘De 
 Legg.’ I, 2; Bochart, ‘ Canaan,’ 11, 2.) ‘These 
 Betulia, however, were meteoric stones, and 
 derived their sanctity from the belief that they 
 had fallen from heaven: and the name has 
 probably but a fancied likeness to the name 
 Bethel. Still the connection of the subse- 
 quent worship of stones with the primitive 
 and pious use of them to mark places of wor- 
 ship is‘most probably a real connection, ‘The 
 erection of all such stones for worship was 
 strictly forbidden in later times (see Lev, xxvi, 
 
 2 And he looked, and behold a 
 well in the field, and, lo, there were 
 three flocks of sheep lying by it; for 
 out of that well they watered the 
 flocks: and a great stone was upon 
 the well’s mouth. 
 
 3 And thither were all the flocks 
 
 1; Deut. xvi, 22, &c.). What was good in 
 its origin had become evil in its abuse, 
 
 21. then shall the Lorpv be my God] 
 So the LXX., Vulg., Syr.; but the Arab, 
 and several of the Hebrew commentators put 
 
 these words in the protasis; ‘‘ And if the 
 
 Lorp will be my God, then shall this stone 
 be God’s house,” &c. ‘The Hebrew is am- 
 biguous, and so is the Targum of Onkelos: 
 but the change of construction and of tense 
 certainly appears to be at the beginning of 
 v. 22, for all the verbs, beginning with “ will 
 keep me” in v. 20 to the end of v. 21, are in 
 the same form (the perfect with vau conver- 
 sive); and in verse 22 there is a change to the 
 future. If this be so, the whole passage will 
 then run, ‘‘If God will be with me and will 
 keep me in the way that I go, and will give 
 me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, and 
 if I come again to my father’s house in peace, 
 and if the Lorp will be my God, then shall 
 this stone, which I have set for a pillar, be 
 the house of God, and of all that Thou shalt 
 give me, I will surely give a tenth unto Thee.” 
 The fulfilment of this vow is related in ch, 
 Xxxv. 15, where God again appears to Jacob 
 on his return from Padan-aram, and Jacob 
 restores the pillar which he had before set up, 
 
 ‘and again solemnly gives it the name of Beth- 
 
 el, ‘‘the house of God” (see Quarry, ‘on 
 Genesis,’ p. 486). 
 
 22. give the tenth unto thee| In ch, xiv. 20, 
 we have an instance of Abraham giving tithes 
 to Melchizedek, Here we have another proof 
 that the duty of giving a tenth to God was 
 recognized before the giving of the Law, 
 
 Cuap, XXIX. 1. Then Facob, &c.] Lit. 
 ‘¢'Then Jacob lifted up his feet and came into 
 the land of the children of the East,” z.e, into 
 Mesopotamia, which lies East of Judea, 
 
 2. he looked, and behold a well] Cp. 
 ch, xxiv, r1—15. ‘The similarity of the two 
 stories results from the unvarying customs of 
 
168 
 
 +t Heb. 
 Is there 
 peace to 
 Ainz? 
 
 +t Heb. 
 
 gathered: and they rolled the stone 
 from the well’s mouth, and watered 
 the sheep, and put the stone again 
 upon the well’s mouth in his place. 
 
 4 And Jacob said unto them, My 
 brethren, whence be ye? And they 
 said, Of Haran are we. 
 
 5 And he said unto them, Know 
 ye Laban the son of Nahor? And 
 they said, We know him. 
 
 6 And he said unto them, ‘/s he 
 well? And they said, He 7s well: 
 and, behold, Rachel his daughter com- 
 eth with the sheep. 
 
 7 And he said, Lo, ‘zt zs yet high 
 
 yeite @ey day, neither is it time that the cattle 
 
 is great. 
 
 should be gathered together: water ye 
 the sheep, and go and feed them. 
 
 8 And they said, We cannot, until 
 all the flocks be gathered together, 
 and ti/] they roll the stone from the 
 well’s mouth; then we water the 
 sheep. 
 
 g { And while he yet spake with 
 them, Rachel came with her father’s 
 sheep: for she kept them. 
 
 10 And it came to pass, when Ja- 
 cob saw Rachel the daughter of La- 
 ban his mother’s brother, and the 
 sheep of Laban his mother’s brother, 
 that Jacob went near, and rolled the 
 stone from the well’s mouth, and wa- 
 
 ot EAGE NESTS A XE 
 
 [v. 4—19. 
 
 tered the flock of Laban his mother’s 
 brother. 
 
 11 And Jacob kissed Rachel, and 
 lifted up his voice, and wept. 
 
 12 And Jacob told Rachel that he 
 was her father’s brother, and that he 
 was Rebekah’s son: and she ran and 
 told her father. 
 
 13 And it came to pass, when La- 
 
 ban heard the ‘tidings of Jacob his t Heb. 
 
 earing. 
 
 sister’s son, that he ran to meet him, 
 and embraced him, and kissed him, 
 and brought him to his house. And 
 he told Laban all these things. 
 
 14 And Laban said to him, Surely 
 thou art my bone and my flesh. And 
 
 he abode with him tthe space of at Heb. 
 a month 
 of days. 
 
 month. 
 
 15 “ And Laban said unto Jacob, 
 Because thou art my brother, shouldest 
 thou therefore serve me for nought? 
 tell me, what shall thy wages be? 
 
 16 And Laban had two daughters: 
 the name of the elder was Leah, and 
 the name of the younger was Rachel. 
 
 17 Leah was tender eyed; but 
 Rachel was beautiful and well fa- 
 voured. 
 
 18 And Jacob loved Rachel; and 
 said, I will serve thee seven years for 
 Rachel thy younger daughter. 
 
 1g And Laban said, /¢ zs better 
 
 the East, and from the natural halting place 
 
 being a well outside a city, 
 
 5. Laban the son of Nahor] i.e. the de- 
 scendant, the grandson of Nahor. Just as in 
 v. 12, Jacob calls himself the brother of La- 
 ban, being in truth his nephew. ‘The omis- 
 sion of Bethuel is here again observable. 
 
 6. Is he well?] Lit, ‘‘Is it peace to him?” 
 
 8. We cannot| Probably because there 
 Was an agreement not to roll away the stone 
 till all were assembled, not because the stone 
 was too heavy for three shepherds to move, 
 
 9. Rachel came with her father’s sheep] 
 So Ex, ii, 16, the daughters of Reuel, the 
 priest of Midian, led their father’s sheep to 
 water, And even now among the Arabs it is 
 not beneath the daughter of an Emir to water 
 the sheep, 
 
 13. he told Laban all these things] i.e. 
 probably the cause of his exile from home, his 
 father’s blessing and command to him to marry 
 a wife of his mother’s kindred, and the va- 
 rious events of his journey, 
 
 14. the space of a month] Lit. “a month 
 of days;” the word ‘‘days” being frequent- 
 ly added to a note of time, as we might 
 say ‘‘a month long,” or as here in the Autho-« 
 rized Version, ‘‘ the space of a month,” 
 
 17. tender eyed] i.e. weak eyed, so LXX,, 
 Vulg., &c, 
 
 18. JI will serve thee seven years for 
 Rachel] In the case of Isaac and Rebekah, 
 Abraham’s servant gives handsome presents to 
 Rebekah, ch. xxiv. 53, the Eastern custom at 
 marriages. Jacob could give neither presents 
 nor dowry, for he was a fugitive from his fa- 
 ther’s house, and describes himself as having 
 passed over Jordan with only his staff (ch. 
 XXxil. 10). He proposes therefore to serve 
 Laban seven years, if he will give him his 
 daughter to wife, a proposal, which Laban’s 
 grasping disposition prompts him to accept, 
 even from one whom he calls brother and 
 of his own bone and flesh (vv. 14, 15). 
 
 19. It is better that I should give her to 
 thee, &c.] It has always been the custom 
 
 wall 
 : val 
 
v. 20—33. | 
 
 that I give her to thee, than that I 
 should give her to another man: abide 
 with me. 
 
 20 And Jacob served seven years 
 for Rachel; and they seemed unto 
 him but a few days, for the love he 
 had to her. | 
 
 21 @ And Jacob said unto Laban, 
 Give me my wife, for my days are 
 fulfilled, that I may go in unto her. 
 
 22 And Laban gathered together all 
 the men of the place, and made a feast. 
 
 23 And it came to pass in the even- 
 ing, that he took Leah his daughter, 
 and brought her to him; and he went 
 in unto her. 
 
 24 And Laban gave unto his daugh- 
 ter Leah Zilpah his maid for an hand- 
 maid. 
 
 25 And it came to pass, that in the 
 morning, behold, it was Leah: and 
 he said to Laban, What zs this thou 
 hast done unto me? did not I serve 
 with thee for Rachel? wherefore then 
 hast thou beguiled me? 
 
 26 And Laban said, It must not 
 be so done in our ‘country, to give 
 the younger before the firstborn. 
 
 GENESIS. XXIX. 
 
 27 Fulfil her week, and we will 
 give thee this also for the service which 
 thou shalt serve with me yet seven 
 other years. 
 
 28 And Jacob did so, and fulfilled 
 her week: and he gave him Rachel 
 his daughter to wife also. 
 
 29 And Laban gave to Rachel his 
 daughter Bilhah his handmaid to be 
 her maid. 
 
 30 And he went in also unto Ra- 
 chel, and he loved also Rachel more 
 than Leah, and served with him yet 
 seven other years. 
 
 31 @ And when the Lorp saw 
 that Leah was hated, he opened her 
 womb: but Rachel was barren. 
 
 32 And Leah conceived, and bare 
 a son, and she called his name 
 ben: for she said, Surely the Lorp 
 hath looked upon my affliction; now 
 therefore my husband will love me. | 
 
 33 And she conceived again, and 
 bare a son; and said, Because the 
 Lorp hath heard that I was hated, 
 he hath therefore given me this son 
 
 also: and she called his name !Si-!Thatis 
 
 hearing. 
 
 meon. 
 
 emeateeee e 
 
 with Eastern tribes to prefer marrying among 
 their own kindred. 
 
 20. but a few days, for the love he had 
 to her] He loved Rachel so much, that he 
 valued the labour of seven years as though 
 it were the labour of but few days in com- 
 parison with the great prize, which that la- 
 bour was to bring him. 
 
 24. Zilpah his maid for an handmaid | 
 So ch. xxiv. 61. 
 
 25. it was Leah] ‘This deception was 
 possible, because there appears to have been 
 no religious or other solemn ceremony, in 
 which the bride was presented to the bride- 
 groom, and the veil in which brides were 
 veiled was so long and close that it concealed, 
 not only the face, but much of the figure also. 
 
 27. Fulfil her week] i.e. celebrate the 
 marriage feast for a week with Leah (cp. 
 Judg. xiv. 12); and after that we will give 
 thee Rachel also. ‘It was not after another 
 week of years that he should receive Rachel 
 to wife; but after the seven days of the first 
 wife’s nuptials.” (St Jerome, ‘Qu. Hebr.’ 
 in loc.) It has been observed that the 
 fraud practised by Laban on Jacob was a fit 
 penalty for the fraud practised by Jacob on 
 
 Isaac and Esau. The polygamy of Jacob 
 must be explained on the same principle as 
 that of Abraham. It had not yet been ex- 
 pressly forbidden by the revealed law of God. 
 The marriage of two sisters also was after- 
 wards condemned (Lev. xviii. 18), but as yet 
 there had been no such prohibition. 
 
 31. was hated] i.e. less loved (cp. Mal, 
 L 3), 
 
 32. Reuben] i.e, ‘¢ Behold a son.” The 
 words which follow are but one of those plays 
 on a name so general in these early days; 
 they do not give the etymology of the name; 
 they have however led some to think that the 
 meaning of ‘‘Reuben” is rather ‘‘the son of 
 vision,” or as Jerome interprets it, ‘the son 
 of God’s gracious regard,” Alium respectus gra- 
 tuiti, ‘The Syr, and Josephus give the name 
 as Reubel, the latter explaining it as ‘‘ the pity 
 of God” (‘ Ant.’ I. 19. 8), which is supported 
 by Michaelis, though it is obviously a corrupt 
 reading (see Rosenm, in loc, and Gesen, 
 p. 1247). 
 
 33. Simeon] i.e. ‘chearing.” The birth of 
 her first son convinces her that God hath 
 seen her, the second that God hath heard 
 her, 
 
 169 
 
 I Reu- ll That is, 
 
 Sێ & SON. 
 
170 
 
 34 And she conceived again, and 
 bare a son; and said, Now this time 
 will my husband be joined unto me, 
 because I have born him three sons: 
 
 1That is, therefore was his name called ' Levi. 
 joined, . ° 
 35 And she conceived again, and 
 ¢ Matt. bare a son: and she said, Now will I 
 mene is, praise the Lorn: therefore she called 
 ’ his name @! Judah; and ‘left bearing. 
 
 t Heb. 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 stood from 
 bearing. 
 1 Rachel, in grief for her barrenness, giveth 
 
 Bithah her maid unto Facob, 5 She beareth 
 Dan and Naphtali. 9 Leah giveth Zilpah 
 her maid, who beareth Gad and Asher. 14 
 Reuben findeth mandrakes, with which Leah 
 buyeth her husband of Rachel. 14 Leah bear- 
 eth Issachar, Zebulun, and Dinah. 22 Rachel 
 beareth Joseph. 25 Facob desireth to depart. 
 27 Laban stayeth him on a new covenant, 
 37 Jacob's policy, whereby he became rich. 
 
 ND when Rachel saw that she 
 bare Jacob no children, Rachel 
 envied her sister; and said unto Ja- 
 cob, Give me children, or else I die. 
 
 2, And Jacob’s anger was kindled 
 against Rachel: and he said, 4m I in 
 God’s stead, who hath withheld from 
 thee the fruit of the womb? 
 3 And she said, Behold my maid 
 Bilhah, go in unto her; and she shall 
 tHeb. _ bear upon my knees, that I may also 
 ue built y t have children by her. 
 
 34, Levi] ‘ Association” or ‘‘associated.” 
 
 35. Judah] i.e. ‘‘praised” (from the Ho- 
 phal future of Jadah), 
 
 CuaAp, XXX, 8. that I may also have 
 children by her| Lit, ‘that I may be built up 
 by her.” (See on ch, xvi, 2.) 
 
 6, Dan] i.e. *judge.” 
 
 8. With great wrestlings] Lit, ‘with 
 wrestlings of God,” ‘The LX X, renders ‘‘ God 
 has helped me,” and Onkelos, ‘‘God has re- 
 ceived my prayer.” So virtually the Syriac. 
 Though the addition of the name of God 
 _often expresses a superlative, yet ‘‘ wrestling” 
 being a type of prayer, it is most probable 
 that in this passage the allusion is to Rachel’s 
 earnest striving in prayer with God for the 
 blessing of offspring, (So Hengst., Del., 
 Keil.) Above, v. 1, Rachel had manifested 
 impatience and neglect of prayer, seeking from 
 Jacob what only could be given of God, 
 Jacob’s remonstrance with her, v. 2, may have 
 -directed her to wiser and better thoughts, 
 
 1l. 4 troop cometh| Rather, Good for- 
 
 GENESIS. XXIX. XXX. 
 
 [v. 34—14 
 
 4 And she gave him Bilhah her 
 handmaid to wife: and Jacob went 
 in unto her. c 
 
 5 And Bilhah conceived, and bare 
 Jacob a son. 
 
 6 And Rachel said, God hath 
 judged me, and hath also heard my 
 voice, and hath given me a son: there- 
 fore called she his name ' Dan. Se 
 
 7 And Bilhah Rachel’s maid con-7 
 ceived again, and bare Jacob a second 
 son. 
 
 8 And Rachel said, With ‘great !Heb. 
 wrestlings have I wrestled with my o God, % 
 sister, and I have prevailed: and she 
 called his name '* Naphtali. I That is, 
 
 g When Leah saw that she had left joe 
 bearing, she took Zilpah her maid, and Mana 
 gave her Jacob to wife. Rpt. 
 
 10 And Zilpah Leah’s maid bare 4m. 
 Jacob a son. 
 
 11 And Leah said, A troop cometh: 
 and she called his name ' Gad. I That is, 
 
 12 And Zilpah Leah’s maid bare company.” 
 Jacob a second son. 
 
 13 And Leah said, ' Happy am I, for / Heb. 
 the daughters will call me blessed : and 4afsiness. 
 she called his name ! Asher. hapa 
 
 14 4 And Reuben went in the days. 
 
 of wheat harvest, and found man- 
 
 drakes in the field, and brought them 
 
 tune cometh, or, ‘in good fortune,” ze. 
 happily, prosperously, ‘The rendering of the 
 Authorized Version is favoured by the Sama- 
 ritan version, and has been supposed to be in 
 accordance with ch, xlix.19. The latter, how- 
 ever, may have no reference to the derivation, 
 but be only the common Oriental play upon a 
 word, ‘The LXX., Vulg., Syr., Onk., Jerus., 
 Pseudo-Jon., all interpret Gad to mean ‘‘ suc 
 cess,” ‘good fortune,” ‘‘prosperity.” So 
 Gesen,, Rosenm., Knobel, Del., Keil, &c. 
 
 13. Happy am I, &c.] Lit. in my hap- 
 piness (am J), for the daughters call 
 me happy; and she called his name 
 Asher, z.e, happy. 
 
 14, mandrakes| So with great unani- 
 mity the ancient versions and most of the 
 Jewish commentators. ‘There is little doubt 
 that the plant was really the atropa mandra- 
 gora, a species closely allied to the deadly 
 nightshade (atropa belladonna). It is not un- 
 common in Palestine (Tristram, pp. 103, 104). 
 It is said to be a narcotic, and to have stupefy- 
 ing and even intoxicating properties. . It has 
 
Vv. 15—2 5] 
 
 unto his mother Leah. ‘Then Rachel 
 said to Leah, Give me, I pray thee, 
 of thy son’s mandrakes. 
 
 15 And she said unto her, Js it a 
 small matter that thou hast taken my 
 husband? and wouldest thou take 
 away my son’s mandrakes also? And 
 Rachel said, Therefore he shall lie 
 with thee to night for thy son’s man- 
 drakes. 
 
 16 And Jacob came out of the 
 field in the evening, and Leah went 
 out to meet him, and said, ‘Thou 
 must come in unto me; for surely 
 I have hired thee with my son’s man- 
 drakes. And he lay with her that 
 night. 
 ~ 17 And God hearkened unto Leah, 
 and she conceived, and bare Jacob the 
 fifth son. 
 
 18 And Leah said, God hath given 
 
 me my hire, because I have given my 
 
 GENESIS. XX Xi 
 
 17E 
 
 maiden to my husband: and she called 
 his name " Issachar. 
 
 1g And Leah conceived again, and 
 bare Jacob the sixth son. 
 
 20 And Leah said, God hath en- 
 dued me with a good dowry; now 
 will my husband dwell with me, be- 
 cause ] have born him six sons: and 
 she called his name '4Zebulun. ne tiae 
 
 21 Andafterwards she bare adaugh- ® Called, 
 ter, and called her name ! Dinah. amet 
 
 22, § AndGod remembered Rachel, (47% 
 and God hearkened to her, and opened 7#sev#. 
 her womb. 
 
 23 And she conceived, and bare a 
 son; and said, God hath taken away 
 my reproach : 
 
 24 And she called his name "Jo- !7hat's 
 seph; and said, The Lorp shall add 
 to me another son. 
 
 25 And it came to pass, when 
 Rachel had born Joseph, that Jacob 
 
 That is, 
 ‘an hire. 
 
 broad leaves and green apples, which become 
 pale yellow when ripe, with a strong tuberous 
 bifid root, in which Pythagoras discerned a 
 likeness to the human form, whence many 
 ancient fables concerning it. ‘They are still 
 found ripe about the time of wheat harvest 
 on the lower ranges of Lebanon and Hermon. 
 The apples are said to produce dizziness; the 
 Arabs believe them to be exhilarating and sti- 
 mulating even to insanity; hence the name 
 tuffah el jan, ‘apples of the jan” (Thomson, 
 ‘Land and Book,’ p. 577). ‘The ancients be- 
 lieved them calculated to produce fruitfulness, 
 and they were used as philtres to conciliate 
 love, hence their name in Hebrew, dudaim, 
 i.e. love-apples. Rachel evidently shared in 
 this superstitious belief. (See Heid. Tom. 1. 
 Ex, xix.; Winer, ‘R. W. B.’ voc. Abram ; 
 Ges. ‘Thes.’ p. 324; Rosenm. in loc.; Smith’s 
 ‘Dict.’ voc. mandrake), &c, 
 
 18. Issachar] i.e. ‘there is a reward.” 
 
 20. Zebulun] i.e. ‘*dwelling,” derived from 
 zabal, to dwell, with a play on the word 
 Zabad, ‘‘to give, to endow.” 
 
 21. Dinah] i.e. “judgment.” It is thought 
 that Jacob had other daughters (see ch. xxxvii, 
 35; xlvi. 7). Daughters, as they did not con- 
 stitute links in a genealogy, are not mentioned 
 except when some important history attaches 
 to them, as in this case the history in ch, 
 XXxlv, 
 
 24. Joseph] i.e. ‘adding,” from jasaph, 
 ‘¢to add,” with a play on asaph, ‘‘to take 
 away.” 
 
 25. when Rachel had born Joseph| It 
 
 has been inferred from this, that Joseph was 
 born at the end of the second seven years of 
 Jacob’s servitude; though it is by no means 
 certain that Jacob demanded his dismissal at 
 the first possible moment. ‘The words of this 
 verse seem to indicate that Jacob did not de- 
 sire to leave Laban, at all events till after Jo- 
 seph’s birth. Many reasons may have induced 
 him to remain in Padan-aram longer than the 
 stipulated fourteen years; the youth of his 
 children unfitting them for a long journey, 
 the pregnancy of some of his wives, the un- 
 happy temper of his beloved Rachel, whom he 
 may have been unwilling to take from her 
 parents, till she had a son of her own to com- 
 fort her; above all, the fear of Esau’s anger, 
 who had resolved to slay him, ‘There is nothing 
 necessarily inconsistent in the narrative, It is 
 possible that Leah should have borne 6, Ra- 
 chel 1, Bilhah 2, and Zilpah 2 sons in seven 
 years, It is not certain that Dinah was born 
 at this time at all. Her birth is only incident- 
 ally noticed. It would be possible even that 
 Zebulun should have been borne by Leah 
 later than Joseph by Rachel; it being by no 
 means necessary that we should believe all the 
 births to have followed in the order in which 
 they are enumerated, which is in the order of 
 mothers, not of births, ‘The common expla- 
 nation is, that the first four sons of Leah were 
 born as rapidly as possible, one after the 
 other, in the first four years of marriage, In 
 the meantime, not necessarily after the birth of 
 Leah’s fourth son, Rachel gives her maid to 
 Jacob, and so very probably Bilhah gave birth 
 to Dan and Naphtali before the birth of Ju- 
 
GENE SISA 20, 
 
 WW, 
 
 said unto Laban, Send me away, that 
 I may go unto mine own place, and 
 to my country. 
 
 26 Give me my wives and my 
 children, for whom I have served 
 thee, and let me go: for thou know- 
 est my service which I have done 
 thee. 
 
 27 And Laban said unto him, I 
 pray thee, if I have found favour in 
 thine eyes, tarry: for I have learned 
 by experience that the Lorp hath 
 blessed me for thy sake. 
 
 28 And he said, Appoint me thy 
 wages, and I will give zt. 
 
 29 And he said unto him, ‘Thou 
 knowest how I have served thee, and 
 how thy cattle was with me. 
 
 30 For it was little which thou 
 hadst before I came, and it is now 'in- 
 creased unto a multitude; and the 
 
 at my foot. LORD hath blessed thee ‘since my 
 
 coming: and now when shall I pro- 
 vide for mine own house also? 
 
 31 And he said, What shall I give 
 thee? And Jacob said, Thou shalt 
 
 not give me any thing: if thou wilt 
 
 [v. 26—36.. 
 
 do this thing for me, I will again feed 
 and keep thy flock: | 
 
 32 I will pass through all thy flock 
 to day, removing from thence all the 
 speckled and spotted cattle, and all 
 the brown cattle among the sheep, 
 and the spotted and speckled among 
 the goats: and of such shall be my 
 hire. 
 
 33 So shall my righteousness an- 
 
 swer for me ‘in time to come, when t Heb. 
 
 Zo mt0r- 
 
 it shall come for my hire before thy 7ow. 
 face: every one that 7s not speckled 
 and spotted among the goats, and 
 brown among the sheep, that shall be 
 counted stolen with me. 
 
 34. And Laban said, Behold, I 
 would it might be according to thy 
 word. 
 
 35 And he removed that day the 
 he goats that were ringstraked and 
 spotted, and all the she goats that were 
 speckled and spotted, and every one 
 that had some white in it, and all the 
 brown among the sheep, and gave 
 them into the hand of his sons. 
 
 36 And he set three days’ journey 
 
 dah, Leah, then finding that she was not 
 likely to bear another son soon, may, in the 
 state of jealousy between the two sisters, have 
 given Zilpah to Jacob, of whom were born 
 Asher and Naphtali, and then again in the 
 very last year of the seven, at the beginning of 
 it, Leah may have borne Issachar, and at the 
 end of it Zebulun, Another difficulty has 
 been found in Reuben’s finding the mandrakes: 
 but there is no reason why he should have 
 been more than four years old, when he dis- 
 covered them, and attracted by their flowers 
 and fruits, brought them to his mother. (See 
 Petav. ‘De Doct. Temp.’ x. 19; Heid. 11, 
 Exer, xv. xviii; Kurtz ‘on the Old Cove- 
 nant,’ in loc.; Keil in loc, &c., and note at 
 end of ch, xxxi,) 
 
 27. I have learned by experience] I have 
 learned by divination, literally either 
 ‘‘T have hissed, muttered” (so Knobel on ch, 
 xliv. 5), or more probably, ‘‘I have divined by 
 omens deduced from serpents” (Boch. ‘ Hier.’ 1. 
 20; Gesen, ‘Th,’ p, 875). ‘The heathenism of 
 Laban’s household appears by ch, xxxi. 19, 323 
 and though Laban acknowledged the Lorp as 
 Jacob’s God, this did not prevent him from 
 using idolatrous and heathenish practices, It 
 1s however quite possible that the word here 
 used may have acquired a wider signification, 
 
 originally meaning to ‘‘divine,” but then hav- 
 ing the general sense of ‘‘investigate,” ‘‘dis- 
 cover,” ‘‘learn by enquiry,” &c, 
 
 30. increased] Lit. broken forth, 
 
 since my coming] Lit, ‘‘at my foot,” ze, 
 God sent blessing to thee following on my 
 footsteps, wherever I went. (See Ges, ‘Th,’ 
 p. 1262.) 
 
 32. removing from thence all the spotted 
 and speckled cattle| It is said, that in the East 
 the sheep are generally white, very rarely black 
 or spotted, and that the goats are black or 
 brown, rarely speckled with white, Jacob 
 therefore proposes to separate from the flock 
 all the spotted and speckled sheep and goats, 
 which would be comparatively few, and to 
 tend only that part of the flock which was 
 pure white or black. He is then to have for 
 his hire only those lambs and kids, born of 
 the unspeckled flock, which themselves should 
 be marked with spots and speckles and ring= 
 strakes. Laban naturally thinks that these will 
 be very few; so he accepts the offer, and, to 
 make matters the surer, he removes all the 
 spotted and ringstraked goats, and all the 
 sheep with any brown in them, three days’ 
 journey from the flock of white sheep and 
 brown goats to be left under Jacob’s care (see 
 
v. 37—8.] 
 
 betwixt himself and Jacob: and Jacob 
 fed the rest of Laban’s flocks. 
 
 37 4 And Jacob took him rods of 
 green poplar, and. of the hazel and 
 chesnut tree; and pilled white strakes 
 in them, and made the white appear 
 which was in the rods. 
 
 38 And he set the rods which he 
 had pilled before the flocks in the 
 gutters in the watering troughs when 
 the flocks came to drink, that they 
 should conceive when they came to 
 
 drink. 
 
 GUNS. Dee Oe Xx I, 
 
 CHAPTER XXXII.” 
 
 1 Yacob upon displeasure departeth secretly. 19 
 Rachel stealeth her father's images. 22 Laban 
 pursueth after him, 26 and complaineth of 
 the wrong. 34 Rachel's policy to hide the 
 images. 36 Facob’s complaint of Laban. 43 
 The covenant of Laban and Facob at Galeed, 
 
 ND he heard the words of La- 
 ban’s sons, saying, Jacob hath 
 taken away all that was our father’s; 
 and of that which was our father’s 
 hath he gotten all this glory. 
 2, And Jacob beheld the counte- 
 nance of Laban, and, behold, it was 
 
 Go 
 
 +t Heb. 
 
 not toward him ‘tas before. 
 as yestere 
 
 39 And the flocks conceived before 
 3 And the Lorp said unto Jacob, ¢ay and 
 
 the rods, and brought forth cattle ae 
 he day 
 
 ringstraked, speckled, and spotted. 
 
 40 And Jacob did separate the 
 lambs, and set the faces of the flocks 
 toward the ringstraked, and all the 
 brown in the flock of Laban;.and he 
 put his own flocks by themselves, and 
 put them not unto Laban’s cattle. 
 
 41 And it came to pass, whenso- 
 ever the stronger cattle did conceive, 
 that Jacob laid the rods before the 
 eyes of the cattle in the gutters, that 
 they might conceive among the rods. 
 
 42 But when the cattle were feeble, 
 he put them not in: so the feebler were 
 Laban’s, and the stronger Jacob’s. 
 
 43 And the man increased exceed- 
 ingly, and had much cattle, and maid- 
 servants, and menservants, and camels, 
 and asses. 
 
 Return unto the land of thy fathers, 
 and to thy kindred; and I will be 
 with thee. 
 
 4. And Jacob sent and called Ra- 
 chel and Leah to the field unto his 
 flock, 
 
 5 And said unto them, I see your 
 father’s countenance, that it zs not 
 toward me as before; but the God 
 of my father hath been with me. 
 
 6 And ye know that with all my 
 power I have served your father. 
 
 7 And your father hath deceived 
 me, and changed my wages ten times ; 
 but God suftered him not to hurt 
 
 me. 
 
 8 If he said thus, The speckled 
 shall be thy wages; then all the cat- 
 tle bare speckled: and if he said thus, 
 
 nnn ER 
 
 vv. 35, 36), lest any of them might stray unto 
 Jacob’s flock and so be claimed by him, or any 
 lambs or kids should be born like them in 
 Jacob’s flock, 
 
 37. poplar] So Celsius (‘ Hierobot.’ 1. 
 292), and many other authorities after the 
 Vulg., but the LX X. and Arab. have the storax 
 tree, which is adopted by Gesenius (p. 740) 
 and many others, 
 
 hazel| Almond, Ges. (p. 747). 
 chesnut tree] Plane-tree, Ges. (p.1071). 
 
 40. And Sacob did separate the lambs] 
 The apparent inconsistency of this with the 
 rest of the narrative, especially with v. 36, has 
 induced some commentators to suspect a cor- 
 ruption in the text. ‘The meaning, however, 
 appears to be, that Jacob separated those 
 lambs, which were born after the artifice men- 
 tioned above, keeping the spotted lambs and 
 kids apart; but though he thus separated them, 
 
 he contrived that the ewes and she goats should 
 have the speckled lambs and kids in sight. 
 ‘‘ His own flocks” mentioned in the latter part 
 of the verse were the young cattle that were 
 born ringstraked and speckled; ‘* Laban’s 
 cattle,” on the contrary, were those of uniform 
 colour in the flock tended by Jacob; not that 
 flock which Laban had separated by three days’ 
 journey from Jacob, 
 
 Cuap, XXXI. 2. as before] Lit. “as 
 yesterday and the day before.” 
 
 5. the God of my father hath been with 
 me| i.e. God has been present with me and 
 has protected me, Jacob calls him the God 
 of his father, so distinguishing the Most High 
 from the gods of the nations and from the 
 idols, which perhaps the family of Laban had 
 worshipped, vv. 19, 30. 
 
 7. ten times] i.e, probably “very fre- 
 quently.” Cp, Num, xiv. 22; Job xix. 3, 
 
 before. 
 
174 
 
 The ringstraked shall be thy hire; 
 then bare all the cattle ringstraked. 
 
 g Thus God hath taken away the 
 cattle of your father, and given them 
 to me. 
 
 10 And it came to pass at the time 
 that the cattle conceived, that I lifted 
 up mine eyes, and saw in a dream, 
 
 thou anointedst the pillar, and where 
 
 GENES TSE Now 
 
 [v. 9—20. 
 
 14 And Rachel and Leah answer- 
 ed and said unto him, Js there yet any 
 portion or inheritance for us in our 
 father’s house? 
 
 15 Are we not counted of him 
 strangers? for he hath sold us, and 
 hath quite devoured also our money. | 
 
 16 For all the riches which God 
 
 1Or, and, behold, the 'rams which leaped hath taken from our father, that is 
 “upon the cattle were ringstraked, spec- ours, and our children’s: now then, 
 kled, and grisled. whatsoever God hath said unto thee, 
 11 And the angel of God spake do. 
 unto me in a dream, saying, Jacob: 17 @ Then Jacob rose up, and set 
 And I said, Here am I. his sons and his wives upon camels ; 
 12 And he said, Lift up now thine 18 And he carried away all his 
 eyes, and see, all the rams which leap cattle, and all his goods which he had 
 upon the cattle are ringstraked, spec- gotten, the cattle of his getting, which 
 kled, and grisled: for I have seen all he had gotten in Padan-aram, for to 
 that Laban doeth unto thee. go to Isaac his father in the land of 
 achap. 28 13 I am the God of Beth-el, “where Canaan. 
 
 19 And Laban went to shear his 
 
 thou vowedst a vow unto me: now sheep: and Rachel had stolen the Weise 
 arise, get thee out from this land, and ‘images that were her father’s. tHeb. 
 return unto the land of thy kindred. 20 And Jacob stole away tuna- (rasan. 
 
 Ee EE ee ee 
 
 10. therams| The he goats. 
 
 grisled] i.e, ‘sprinkled as with hail,” the 
 literal meaning of the word “ grisled.” 
 
 13. Jam the God of Beth-el] (Heb, ‘ El- 
 Beth-el.”) In v. rz it is said, ‘the angel of 
 God spake unto me,” ‘The Jewish com- 
 mentators explain this by saying that God 
 spoke through the mouth of the angel, and 
 therefore though the angel actually spoke to 
 Jacob, yet the words are the words of God. 
 The Christian fathers generally believe all such 
 visions to have been visions of the Son of God, 
 who is both God and the angel of God: see 
 on ch, xvi. 7. 
 
 There is no necessary contradiction between 
 this dream and the account of Jacob’s artifice 
 given in the last chapter. If the dream oc- 
 curred just before the flight of Jacob from 
 Laban, it would be an indication to Jacob 
 that all his artifices would have had no effect, 
 had it not been God’s pleasure that he should 
 grow rich, ‘The labours of the husbandman 
 do not prosper but through the blessing of 
 God. It seems, however, not improbable that 
 Jacob is here relating to his wives two dreams, 
 that concerning the sheep and goats having 
 occurred at the beginning of his agreement 
 with Laban, and that in which he was com- 
 manded to depart from Padan-aram just 
 before his actual departure. This was sug- 
 gested by Nachmanides and is approved by 
 Rosenmiiller, If so, we may infer, that Jacob 
 believed the promise that the sheep which were 
 
 to be his hire should multiply rapidly: but yet 
 consistently with his mixed character, partly 
 believing and partly impatient of the fulfil- 
 ment, he adopted natural means for bringing 
 about this event which he desired (so Kurtz 
 and apparently Keil), 
 
 15. she hath sold us| Probably refer- 
 ring to Laban’s giving his daughter to Jacob 
 as wages for his service, 
 
 19. And Laban went to shear his sheep] 
 The force of the tenses in the Hebrew will 
 perhaps be better explained as follows: ‘‘ Now 
 Laban had gone to shear his sheep, and (or, 
 whereupon) Rachel stole the Teraphim which 
 were her father’s, and Jacob stole away una- 
 wares to (lit. stole the heart of) Laban the 
 Syrian,” ‘There may be a series of parono- 
 masias in the Hebrew, ‘Rachel stole the 
 Teraphim,” ‘‘ Jacob sto/e the heart of Laban;” 
 and again, ‘‘the heart of Laban” is Led- 
 Laban, the first syllable of Laban correspond- 
 ing with the word for ‘ heart,” 
 
 images] Teraphim. ‘These were un- 
 doubtedly images in the human form, but 
 whether whole length figures or only busts 
 has been much doubted, In 1x S, xix. 13, Michal 
 puts teraphim (the plural perhaps for a single 
 image) in David’s bed to deceive the messen- 
 gers of Saul; which looks as if the image was 
 of the size of life. In the present history as 
 Rachel hides them under the camel’s saddle, 
 they were probably not so large. Laban calls 
 them his gods v. 30, which corresponds with 
 
t Heb. 
 
 hast stolen 
 
 He. 
 
 y. 21—34-] 
 
 wares to Laban the Syrian, in that-he 
 told him not that he fled. 
 
 21 So he fled with all that he had; 
 and he rose up, and passed over the 
 river, and set his face toward the 
 mount Gilead. 
 
 22, And it was told Laban on the 
 third day that Jacob was fled. 
 
 23 And he took his brethren with 
 him, and pursued after him seven 
 days’ journey ; and they overtook him 
 in the mount Gilead. 
 
 24 And God came to Laban the 
 Syrian in a dream by night, and said 
 unto him, Take heed that thou speak 
 not to Jacob ‘either good or bad. 
 
 25 4 Then Laban overtook Jacob. 
 Now Jacob had pitched his tent in 
 the mount: and Laban with his bre- 
 thren pitched in the mount of Gilead. 
 
 26 And Laban said to Jacob, 
 What hast thou done, that thou hast 
 stolen away unawares to me, and 
 carried away my daughters, as cap- 
 tives taken with the sword? 
 
 27 Wherefore didst thou flee away 
 secretly, and ‘steal away from me; 
 and didst not tell me, that I might 
 have sent thee away with mirth, and 
 with songs, with tabret, and with harp? 
 
 Cae Emer 
 
 28 And hast not suffered me to 
 kiss my sons and my daughters? thou 
 hast now done foolishly in so doing. 
 
 29 It is in the power of my hand 
 to do you hurt: but the God of your 
 father spake unto me yesternight, say- 
 ing, Take thou heed that thou speak 
 not to Jacob either good or bad. 
 
 30 And now, though thou would- 
 est needs be gone, because thou sore 
 longedst after thy father’s house, yet 
 wherefore hast thou stolen my gods? 
 
 31 And Jacob answered and said 
 to Laban, Because I was afraid: for 
 I said, Peradventure thou wouldest 
 take by force thy daughters from 
 me. 
 
 32 With whomsoever thou findest 
 thy gods, let him not live: before. 
 our brethren discern thou what 7s 
 thine with me, and take 7¢. to thee. 
 For Jacob knew not that Rachel had 
 stolen them. 
 
 33 And Laban went into Jacob’s 
 tent, and into Leah’s tent, and into 
 the two maidservants’ tents; but he 
 found them not. ‘Then went he out 
 of Leah’s tent, and entered into Ra- 
 chel’s tent. 
 
 34. Now Rachel had taken the im-. 
 
 nn 
 
 what we find afterwards concerning their wor- 
 ship (see Judg. xvii. 5; xviii. 14, 17, 18, 20). 
 They are condemned with other idolatrous 
 practices (x S, xv. 23; 2 K, xxiii. 24), and in 
 later times we find that they were consulted 
 for purposes of divination (Ezek, xxi, 21; Zech, 
 x, 2). ‘They have been generally considered 
 as similar to the Penates of the classical na- 
 tions, Most probably they were of the nature 
 of a fetish, used for purposes of magic and 
 divination, rather than strictly objects of di- 
 vine worship, In them we perhaps see the 
 earliest form of patriarchal idolatry; a know- 
 ledge of the true God not wholly gone, but 
 images, perhaps of ancestors, preserved, re- 
 vered and consulted, ‘There have been nu- 
 merous conjectures as to the derivation of the 
 name. ‘The majority of recent Hebraists refer 
 to the Arab. root tarafa, *‘to enjoy the good 
 things of life,” and think that teraphim were 
 preserved and honoured, like the penates, or 
 the household fairy, to secure domestic pro- 
 sperity (see Ges, ‘'Thes,’ p. 1520). Other but 
 improbable derivations are that suggested by 
 Castell from the Syriac Teraph, ‘‘to enquire,” 
 
 alluding to their use as oracles; and that by 
 Prof. Lee, from the Ethiopic root, signifying 
 ‘6to remain, survive,” so that the name may 
 originally have meant “relics,” ‘The motive 
 of Rachel’s theft has been as much debated as 
 the root of the word and the use of the images, 
 It is at all events probable, that Rachel, though 
 a worshipper of Jacob’s God, may not have 
 thrown off all the superstitious credulity of her 
 own house, and that she stole the teraphim for 
 some superstitious purpose, 
 
 20, stole away unawares to Laban] Lit. 
 ‘¢ stole the heart of Laban,” i.e, deceived his 
 mind and intelligence. 
 
 Q1, the river] The Euphrates. 
 
 mount Gilead] So called by anticipation. 
 It received the name from what occurred be- 
 low, vv. 46, 47. 
 
 26. as captives taken with the sword | 
 As captives of the sword. 
 
 29. It isin the power of my hand] So 
 probably, not as Hitzig, Knobel, Keil, &c., 
 ‘¢my hand is for God,” ie, my hand serves 
 me for God, is powerful, 
 
ages, and put them in the camel’s 
 furniture, and sat upon them. And 
 Laban ‘searched all the tent, but 
 found them not. 
 
 35 And she said to her father, Let 
 it not displease my lord that I cannot 
 rise up before thee; for the custom of 
 women zs upon me. And he search- 
 ed, but found not the images. 
 
 36 {@ And Jacob was wroth, and 
 chode with Laban: and Jacob an- 
 swered and said to Laban, What 7s 
 my trespass? what zs my sin, that 
 tnou.hast so hotly pursued after me? 
 
 37 Whereas thou hast ‘searched 
 all my stuff, what hast thou found of 
 all thy household stuff? set zt here 
 before my brethren and thy brethren, 
 that they may judge betwixt us both. 
 
 38 This twenty years have I been 
 with thee; thy ewes and thy she 
 goats have not cast their young, and 
 the rams of thy flock have [ not eaten. 
 
 39 That which was torn of beasts 
 I brought not unto thee; I bare the 
 loss of it; of ’my hand didst thou 
 require it, whether stolen by day, or 
 stolen by night. 
 
 40 Thus I was; in the day the 
 drought consumed me, and the frost 
 by night; and my sleep departed from 
 mine eyes. 
 
 GENESTSiaX a 
 
 [v. 35—47. 
 
 41 Thus have I been twenty years 
 in thy house; I served thee fourteen 
 years for thy two daughters, and six 
 years for thy cattle: and thou hast 
 changed my wages ten times. 
 
 42 Except the God of my father, 
 the God of Abraham, and the fear of 
 Isaac, had been with me, surely thou 
 hadst sent me away now empty. God 
 hath seen mine affliction and the la- 
 bour of my hands, and rebuked thee 
 yesternight. . 
 
 43 § And Laban answered and 
 said unto Jacob, These daughters are 
 my daughters, and these children are 
 my children, and these cattle are my 
 cattle, and all that thou seest 7s mine: 
 and what can I do this day unto 
 these my daughters, or unto their 
 children which they have born? 
 
 44. Now therefore come thou, let 
 us make a covenant, I and thou; and 
 let it be for a witness between me 
 and thee. 
 
 45 And Jacob took a stone, and 
 set it up for a pillar. 
 
 46 And Jacob said unto his bre- 
 thren, Gather stones; and they took 
 stones, and made an heap: and they 
 did eat there upon the heap. 
 
 47 And Laban called it ' Jegar-sa- 1 That is, 
 hadutha: but Jacob called it Galeed. 744%0 Y 
 
 Oi 
 
 834] the camel's furniture] The word for 
 furniture (Car, perhaps cognate with currus, 
 car, carry, carriage, &c,), seems to have signi- 
 fied a covered seat, litter, or palanquin, which 
 was placed on the back of the camel for carry- 
 ing women and children and supplied with 
 curtains for concealing them, not only from 
 sun and wind, but also from public view (see 
 Ges, ‘Thes,’ p. 715 and the authorities there 
 referred to), ‘The Teraphim, being probably 
 not of large size, would easily be concealed 
 under such apparatus, 
 
 38. This twenty years] See above, v. 41. 
 On the chronology, see Note A at the end 
 of this chapter, 
 
 40. in the day the drought consumed me, 
 and the frost by night] In the East it-is com- 
 mon for extremely hot days to be succeeded 
 by very cold nights, 
 
 42. the fear of Isaac] ‘That is to say, 
 the object of Isaac’s reverential awe. The 
 whole history of Isaac points him out to us as 
 a man of subdued spirit, whilst his father 
 
 Abraham appears as of livelier faith and as 
 admitted to a more intimate communion with 
 God, Hence Jacob not unnaturally calls his 
 father’s God ‘the fear of Isaac,” 
 
 47. Laban called it Jegar-sahadutha: but 
 Jacob called it Galeed| Jegar-sahadutha is 
 the Aramaic (Chaldee or Syriac) equivalent 
 for the Hebrew Galeed; both meaning the 
 ‘heap of witness,” It appears therefore that 
 at this time Jacob spoke Hebrew whilst his 
 uncle Laban spoke Syriac, We can only ac- 
 count for this by supposing either that the 
 family of Nahor originally spoke Syriac and 
 that Abraham and his descendants learned 
 Hebrew in Canaan, where evidently the He- 
 brew language was indigenous when he first 
 went there, having probably been acquired. by 
 the Hamitic Canaanites from an earlier She- 
 mite race—or else, which is not otherwise 
 supported, that the ancestors of Laban having 
 left the early seat of the family had unlearned 
 their original Hebrew and acquired the Syriac 
 dialect of Padan-aram, 
 
v. 48—55.] 
 48 And Laban said, This heap zs 
 
 a witness between me and thee this 
 day. Therefore was the name of it 
 
 called Galeed ; 
 
 GENESIS. 
 
 XX XI. 
 
 pillar de witness, that I will not pass 
 over this heap to thee, and that thou 
 shalt not pass over this heap and this 
 pillar unto me, for harm. 
 
 thatis, 49 And ' Mizpah; for he said, The 53 The God of Abraham, and the 
 eek. ORD watch between me and thee, God of Nahor, the God of their fa- 
 wer. when we are absent one from an- ther, judge betwixt us. And Jacob 
 
 other. 
 
 sware by the fear of his father Isaac. 
 
 177 
 
 50 If thou shalt afflict my daugh- 
 
 54 Then Jacob ' offered sacrifice 1 or, 
 ters, or if thou shalt take other wives 
 
 upon the mount, and called his bre- eee 
 
 beside my daughters, no man zs with 
 us; see, God 7s witness betwixt me 
 and thee. 
 
 51 And Laban said to Jacob, Be- 
 hold this heap, and behold ¢hzs pillar, 
 which I have cast betwixt me and 
 thee ; 
 
 52 This heap Je witness, and this 
 
 thren to eat bread: and they did eat 
 bread, and tarried all night in the 
 mount. 
 
 55 And early in the morning La- 
 ban rose up, and kissed his sons and 
 his daughters, and blessed them: and 
 Laban departed, and returned unto 
 his place. 
 
 49, Mizpah] i.e, ‘‘ watch-tower.” 
 
 The Lorp watch] Here Laban adopts both 
 the language and the theology of Jacob. He 
 calls the place Mizpah, which is a Hebrew 
 name, and he acknowledges the watchfulness 
 of JEHOVAH the God of Abraham, 
 
 53. The God of Abraham, and the God of 
 Nahor, the God of their father, judge between us| 
 The verb judge is in the plural. This looks as 
 if Laban acknowledged JEHOVAH as Jacob’s 
 God and Abraham’s God, but being himself de- 
 scended from Nahor and Terah and doubting 
 whether the God who called Abraham from his 
 father’s house was the same as the God whom 
 Terah and Nahor had served before, he couples 
 the God of Abraham with the God of Nahor 
 and Terah, and calls on both to witness and 
 judge, Polytheism had still hold on Laban, 
 
 though he felt the power of the God of Jacob, 
 We learn from Josh, xxiv. 2, that the ances- 
 tors of Abraham worshipped strange gods, 
 There is a very marked unity of purpose 
 throughout this chapter in the use of the names 
 of the Most High, utterly inconsistent with 
 the modern notion of a diversity of authors, 
 according to some not fewer than four, in the 
 different portions of the same chapter, To 
 Jacob He is JEHOVAH, v. 3, and the God of 
 his father, v. 5, &c., whilst Laban acknow- 
 ledges Him as the God of Jacob’s father, v. 
 29. Once more Jacob refers to Himas the 
 God of Abraham and the fear of Isaac (v. 42), 
 by appeal to whom it was but likely that 
 Laban would be moved; and lastly Laban, 
 being so moved, himself appeals to the watch- 
 fulness of JEHOVAH, v. 49, but yet joins with 
 Him, as possibly a distinct Being, the God of 
 their common ancestor Nahor, 
 
 epee 3 
 
 NOTE A on Cuwap. xxxt. v. 41. ON THE CHRONOLOGY OF Jacop’s LIFE. 
 
 (1) Difficulty of the question. 
 (3) Dates on this hypothesis. 
 obtained. 
 
 TuE difficulties in the Chronology of the life of 
 Jacob and his sons are very great, so great 
 that Le Clerc has said, ‘‘There occur en- 
 tanglements (nod?) in these things which no 
 one has yet unravelled, nor do I believe 
 will any one ever unravel them.” It has 
 been generally held by commentators, Jew- 
 ish and Christian, that Isaac was 137 and 
 Jacob 77 when Jacob received his father’s 
 blessing, and left his father’s house to go to 
 Padan-aram. (See note, ch. xxxvil. 1.) This 
 calculation rests mainly on the following two 
 points: the rst is that Joseph was born just 
 fourteen years after Jacob went to Haran, ze. 
 at the end of the second hebdomade which 
 
 i, Corerae 
 
 Common reckoning. 
 (4) Greater facility for explaining the events thus 
 
 (2) Suggestion of Dr Kennicott. 
 
 Jacob served for his wives; an inference, 
 which would oblige us to conclude that all 
 the sons of Jacob except Benjamin, eleven in 
 number, were born in six years, a thing not 
 quite impossible, but highly improbable (see 
 on ch, xxx. 25). The second is, that Jacob, 
 in vv. 38, 41, Of this ch. xxxi. seems to Say 
 that his whole sojourn in Padan-aram was 
 only twenty years. If these points be made 
 out, we cannot deny the conclusion, that as 
 Joseph was 39 when Jacob was 130, and so 
 born when Jacob was 91, therefore Jacob 
 must have been 91—14=77, When he fled 
 from Beer-sheba to Padan-aram, 
 As regards the first point, however, it has 
 M 
 
178 
 
 already been seen (note on ch, xxx. 23), that 
 it is not necessary to conclude that Jacob 
 should have wished to leave Laban immediately 
 on the conclusion of his 14 years’ servitude. 
 On the contrary, with his children too young 
 to carry on so long a journey, with but little 
 independent substance, and with the fear of 
 Esau before his eyes, it is far more likely that 
 he should have been willing to remain longer 
 in the service of Laban. But, if this be so, 
 we have then an indefinite time left us for this 
 additional sojourn, limited only by the words 
 ‘‘when Rachel had born Joseph” (ch. xxx. 
 25). Jacob may have lived and worked for 
 twenty years longer with Laban, and not have 
 asked for his dismissal, till Joseph was old 
 enough to travel, or at all events till he was 
 born. 
 
 As to the second point, almost all commen- 
 tators take the statements in vv. 38 and 41 as 
 identical, v. 41 being but a repetition, with 
 greater detail, of the statement in v. 38, as 
 appears in the translation of the Authorized 
 Version. It has, however, been suggested by 
 Dr Kennicott, that very probably the twenty 
 years in v, 38 are not the same twenty years 
 as those mentioned in v. 41, and that the 
 sense of the Hebrew would be better express- 
 ed as follows, v. 38, ‘‘one twenty years I was 
 with thee” (ze. taking care of thy flocks for 
 thee but not in thy house) ; and (v. 41), ‘‘an- 
 other twenty years I was for myself in thy 
 house, serving thee fourteen years for thy two 
 daughters and six years for thy cattle.” This, 
 he contends, is a legitimate mode of rendering 
 the repeated particle (ze/, zeh). Each mention 
 of the twenty years is introduced with the 
 word zeh, ‘‘this,” which word, when repeated, 
 is used in opposition or by way of distinction 
 (see Ex, xiv.20; Job xxi. 23, 253 Eccl. vi. 5). 
 He understands Jacob therefore as saying, that 
 he had served Laban fourteen years for his 
 wives, after that he had for twenty years 
 taken care of his cattle, not as a servant but 
 as a neighbour and friend; and then, not 
 satisfied to go on thus without profit, at last 
 for six years more he served for wages, during 
 which short period Laban had changed his 
 hire ro times, 
 
 If this reasoning be correct, and Bp Horsley 
 has said that Dr Kennicott assigns unanswer- 
 able reasons for his opinion, then the follow- 
 ing table will give the dates of the chief events 
 in Jacob’s life, 
 
 CHAPTER XXXII, 
 
 1 Facobl’s vision at Mahanaim. 3 His mes- 
 sage to Esau. 6 He is afraid of Esau’s 
 coming. 9 He prayeth for deliverance. 
 13 He sendeth a present to Esau. 24 He 
 curestleth with an angel at Peniel, where he is 
 called Israd. 3t He halteth. 
 
 ND Jacob went on his way, and 
 the angels of God met him. 
 
 GENESIS XX XT, [v. Tet. 
 
 Years es Lager 
 ile 
 o Jacob and Esau born. 
 40 Esau marries two Hittite wives, 
 Gen. xxvi. 34. 
 57 Jacob goes to Padan-aram, Isaac 
 being 117. 
 8 Esau goes to Ishmael and marries 
 his daughter, Gen. xxviii. 9. 
 
 3. Ishmaeldies, aged 137,Gen.xxv. 17. 
 4 Jacob marries Leah and Rachel, 
 Gen. xxix. 20, 21, 27, 28. 
 {ton Simeon, Levi, and Judah, 
 
 14 years’ service, 
 a 
 
 i een pains 
 
 ‘oO 
 “wr 
 
 born of Leah. 
 Dan and Naphtali born of Bilhah. 
 71 End of fourteen years’ service, 
 72 Beginning of 20 years mentioned 
 in Gen. xxxi. 38. 
 
 2) S Gad and Asher born of Zilpah. } 
 
 S Issachar and Zebulun born of } 
 
 m>DH ‘ 
 
 o'n Leah, a | 
 wo . 
 
 ay Dinah born. 
 
 Joseph born of Rachel. 
 Agreement made, Gen.xxx. 25 —34. 
 Events in the family unknown. 
 Flight from Padan-aram. 
 98 Benjamin born, Rachel dies, 
 108 Joseph at 17 is carried to Egypt, 
 Gen, xxxvii. 2. 
 120 Isaac dies at 180, Gen. xxxv. 28. 
 121 Joseph, aged 30, Governor of 
 Egypt. 
 130 Jacob goes down to Egypt, Gen. 
 xlvi. I. 
 147 Jacob dies, Gen. xlvii. 28. 
 
 It is not possible to date accurately the 
 events in ch. xxxiv., xxxviii., but the above 
 seems a far more probable chronology than 
 that commonly acquiesced in. According to 
 the common calculation, Judah and his sons 
 Er and Onan must have been quite children 
 when they married, whereas the assigning 40 
 instead of 20 years to the sojourn of*Jacob in 
 Padan-aram, will allow time for them to have 
 grown up, though even so their marriages 
 must have been for that time unusually early. 
 The common calculation, which makes Jacob 
 84 at his marriage, whilst his son Judah could 
 not have been more than 20, and his grand- 
 children Er and Onan not above 15 when 
 they married (see Keil on ch, xxxviii.), must 
 surely require some correction, even allowing 
 for the length of patriarchal lives on the one 
 side and for the early age of eastern marriages 
 on the other. 
 
 ome) 
 nH 
 
 6years’ 
 service 
 for cattle. 
 
 2, And when Jacob saw them, he 
 said, ‘This zs God’s host: and he 
 called the name of that place "Ma- ' Thatis, 
 hanaim. on cee 
 3 And Jacob sent messengers be- 
 fore him to Esau his brother unto the 
 land of Seir, the country of Edom. + Heb, 
 
 4 And he commanded them, say-” 
 
v. 5—I0.| _ 
 
 ing, Thus shall ye speak unto my 
 lord Esau; Thy servant Jacob saith 
 thus, I have sojourned with Laban, 
 and stayed there until now: 
 
 5 And I have oxen, and asses, 
 flocks, and menservants, and women- 
 servants: and I have sent to tell my 
 lord, that I may find grace in thy 
 sight. 
 
 6 4 And the messengers returned 
 to Jacob, saying, We came to thy 
 
 GENE SL Sea ORT. 
 
 and distressed: and he divided the 
 people that was with him, and the 
 flocks, and herds, and the camels, in- 
 to two bands; 
 
 8 And said, If Esau come to the 
 one company, and smite it, then the 
 other company which is left shall 
 escape. 
 
 @ And Jacob said, O God of 
 my father Abraham, and God of my 
 father Isaac, the Lorp which saidst 
 
 179 
 
 unto me, * Return unto thy country, @ chap. 3r. 
 
 and to thy kindred, and | will deal eit. 
 I am less 
 
 well with thee: 
 than all, 
 
 brother Esau, and also he cometh to 
 meet thee, and four hundred men 
 with him. 
 
 7 Then Jacob was greatly afraid 
 
 10 ‘I am not worthy of the least ec. 
 
 CHap, XXXII. 1. the angels of God 
 met him| ‘The conjectures of various Jewish 
 interpreters concerning this vision of angels 
 may be seen in Heidegger, Tom. 1. Ex. xv. 
 § 37. The real purpose of it seems to have 
 been this. When Jacob was flying from Esau’s 
 anger into Mesopotamia, he had a vision of 
 angels ascending and descending on the ladder 
 of God. He was thus assured of God’s pro- 
 vidential care over him, and mysteriously 
 taught that there was a way from heaven to 
 earth and from earth to heaven. Now he is 
 again about to fall into the power of Esau ; 
 and so the angels encamped, perhaps on each 
 side of him (Mahanaim, v. 2, signifying ‘‘two 
 camps”), may have been sent to teach him, 
 as a similar vision taught afterwards the serv- 
 ant of Elisha (2 K. vi. 16, 17), that, though 
 he was encompassed with danger, there were 
 more with him than could be against him, or, 
 as the Psalmist wrote afterwards, that ‘‘the 
 angel of the Lorp encampeth round about 
 them that fear him, and delivereth them” (Ps. 
 xxxiv. 7). Thus Josephus (‘A. J.’ 1. 20) 
 says, ‘‘these visions were vouchsafed to Jacob 
 returning into Canaan, to encourage him with 
 happy hopes of what should befal him after- 
 wards,” and St Chrysost. (‘Hom. 58 in Gen.’), 
 ‘‘the fear of Laban having passed away, there 
 succeeded to it the fear of Esau; therefore the 
 merciful Lord, willing that the pious man 
 should be encouraged and his fear dispelled, 
 ordained that he should see this vision of 
 angels.” 
 
 2. Mabhanaim] i.e. “*two camps,” Some 
 have thought the dual here used for the plural ; 
 others that Jacob thought of his own camp 
 and the camp of angels. (So Abenezra, and 
 after him Clericus.) More likely the angels 
 were encamped on the right-hand and on the 
 left, so seeming to surround and protect Jacob 
 (seeon v.1). The place called Mahanaim 
 was in the tribe of Gad, and was assigned to 
 the Levites, Josh. xxi. 38. The name Mab- 
 
 neh is still retained in the supposed site of the 
 ancient town (Robinson). 
 
 83. unto the land of Seir, the country of 
 Edom] It does not follow necessarily from 
 this verse, that Seir had by this time become 
 Esau’s permanent place of residence. ‘The 
 historian calls Seir the country of Edom, be- 
 cause it had become so long before Moses 
 wrote. Esau was a great hunter, and very 
 probably a conqueror, who took possession of 
 Seir, driving out or subjugating the Horites. 
 It may have been for this very conquest, that 
 he was now at the head of 400 armed men 
 (v. 6). He had not yet removed his house- 
 hold from Canaan (ch. xxxvi. 6); and did 
 not settle permanently in his newly conquered 
 possession till after his father’s death, when, 
 yielding to the assignment made to Jacob by 
 Isaac’s blessing, he retires to Idumza, and leaves 
 Canaan to Jacob (ch.xxxvi.1—8). (See Kurtz 
 in loc.) 
 
 7, Jacob was greatly afraid and dis- 
 tressed| Though he had just seen a vision of 
 angels, he was not unnaturally alarmed at the 
 apparently hostile approach of Esau. He 
 makes therefore all preparation for that ap- 
 proach, and then takes refuge in prayer. His 
 faith was imperfect, but he was a religious 
 man, and so he seeks in his terror help from 
 God. 
 
 9. O God of my father Abraham, and 
 God of my father Isaac, the Lorp| ‘This 
 combination of names is natural and exact. 
 He appeals to the Most High as the Covenant 
 God, who had given promises to his fathers, 
 of which promises he himself was the heir, 
 and who had revealed Himself to the chosen 
 family as the self-existent JEHOVAH, who 
 would be their God. The whole prayer is 
 one of singular beauty and piety. 
 
 10. Iam not worthy of the least of all 
 the mercies] Lit. ‘*1 am less than all the 
 mercies.” 
 
 M2 
 
180° 
 
 t Heb, 
 upon, 
 
 of all the mercies, and of all the 
 truth, which thou hast shewed unto 
 thy servant; for with my staff I 
 passed over this Jordan; and now I 
 am become two bands. 
 
 11 Deliver me, I pray thee, from 
 the hand of my brother, from the 
 hand of Esau: for I fear him, lest 
 he will come and smite me, and the 
 mother ‘with the children. 
 
 12 And thou saidst, I will surely 
 do thee good, and make thy seed as 
 the sand of the sea, which cannot be 
 numbered for multitude. 
 
 13 4 And he lodged there that 
 same night; and took of that which 
 came to his hand a present for Esau 
 his brother ; 
 
 14 Iwo hundred she goats, and 
 twenty he goats, two hundred ewes, 
 and twenty rams, 
 
 15 Thirty milch camels with their 
 colts, forty kine, and ten bulls, twenty 
 she asses, and ten foals. 
 
 16 And he delivered them into the 
 hand of his servants, every drove by 
 themselves; and said unto his ser- 
 vants, Pass over before me, and put 
 a space betwixt drove and drove. 
 
 17 And he commanded the fore- 
 most, saying, When Esau my bro- 
 
 GENE SIS See aes 
 
 [v. 1I—24, » 
 
 ther meeteth thee, and asketh thee, 
 saying, Whose art thou? and whi- 
 ther goest thou? and whose are these 
 before thee? 
 
 18 Then thou shalt say, They be 
 thy servant Jacob’s; it zs a present 
 sent unto my lord Esau: and, behold, 
 also he zs behind us. 
 
 Ig And so commanded he the se- 
 cond, and the third, and all that fol- 
 lowed the droves, saying, On this 
 manner shall ye speak unto Esau, 
 when ye find him. , 
 
 20 And say ye moreover, Behold, 
 thy servant Jacob zs behind us. For 
 he said, I will appease him with the 
 present that goeth before me, and 
 afterward I will see his face; perad- 
 venture he will accept ' of me. 
 
 him: and himself lodged that night in 
 the company. 
 
 22 And he rose up that night, 
 and took his two wives, and _ his 
 two womenservants, and his eleven 
 sons, and passed over the ford Jab- 
 
 bok. 
 
 23 And he took them, and *sent + Heb. 
 
 caused to 
 
 them over the brook, and sent over 37% 
 that he had. 
 24 { And Jacob was left alone; 
 
 eee OO a aaa 
 
 11. the mother with the children] Lit. 
 *fupon the children.” Whence some have 
 thought that there was allusion to the mother 
 protecting the child, as a bird covers its young 
 (Tuch, Knobel, Keil), or to the slaying of the 
 child before the parent’s eyes, and then the 
 parent upon him (Ros.); but the sense seems 
 correctly expressed by ‘‘ with,” as in Ex. xxv. 
 22; Num. xx. 11; Deut. xvi. 3; Job xxxviii. 
 32, &c. (See Ges. ‘Thes.’ p. 1027.) 
 
 13. of that which came to his hand] 
 or perhaps ‘‘that which had come to his 
 hand,” i.e. into his possession, what he pos- 
 sessed. 
 
 20. I will appease him, &c.] The sen- 
 tence literally rendered would be, “I will 
 cover his face with the present that goeth be- 
 fore me, and afterward I will see his face, 
 peradventure he will accept my face.” ‘To 
 cover the eyes or the face” was an expression 
 apparently signifying to induce the person to 
 turn away from or connive at a fault. (Ges. 
 Pp- 700, 706.) ‘*T’o accept or lift up the 
 
 face” was equivalent to accepting a person 
 favourably (Jé. p. 915). 
 
 22. the ford Jabbok| or “‘the ford of 
 Jabbok.” ‘The name Jabbok is either derived 
 from dakak, ‘‘to pour forth, to gush forth,” 
 or from abak, ‘‘to wrestle,” from the wrest- 
 ling of Jacob there. It flowed into the Jor- 
 dan about half way between the Dead Sea and 
 the sea of Galilee, at a point nearly opposite 
 to Shechem. It is now called Zerka, i.e. 
 “blue” (Ges. ‘ Thes.’ p. 232). 
 
 23. the brook] ‘The word signifies either 
 a brook, a torrent, or the bed of a torrent, 
 sometimes dry and sometimes flowing, like 
 the Arabic Wady. 
 
 24. Jacob was left alone] He tre- 
 mained to the last that he might see all his 
 family pass safely through the ford, that he 
 might prevent anything being left behind 
 through carelessness; and most probably that 
 he might once more give himself to earnest 
 prayer for God’s protection in his expected 
 meeting with his brother Esau. 
 
 t Heb. 
 21 So went the present over before ”?/“~ 
 
———— eee 
 
 v. 25—26.] 
 
 and there wrestled a man with him 
 
 Heb. until the ' breaking of the day. 
 ytke 25 And when he saw that he pre- 
 
 worming. sailed not against him, he touched day breaketh. And he said, ?1 will ¢ Hos. rz, 
 
 the hollow of his thigh; and the 
 
 there wrestled a man with him] He is 
 called ‘‘the angel,’ Hos. xii. 4, and Jacob 
 says of him (v. 30), ‘*I have seen God face 
 to face.” ‘The Jews of course believed that 
 he was a created angel, and said that he was 
 the angel of Esau, i.e. either Esau’s special 
 guardian angel (cp. Acts xii. 15), or the 
 angel that presided over Esau’s country (cp. 
 Dan. x. 13). So Abenezra and Abarbanel. 
 Many Christian commentators also prefer to 
 consider this a vision of a created angel, as 
 thinking it inconsistent with the greatness of 
 the Creator to have manifested Himself in 
 this manner to Jacob. Most of the fathers, 
 however, thought this to have been one of the 
 manifestations of the Logos, of the eternal 
 Son, anticipatory of His incarnation. ‘Theo- 
 doret (Qu. 92 in Gen.) argues thus at 
 length. (See also Justin M. ‘Dial.’ § 126; 
 Tertull. ‘Contra Marcion.’ c. 3; Euseb. 
 “Ho ft, 22: August. ‘De C. D.’ Xvi. 39, 
 &c. &c.). From vv. 29, 30, this seems the 
 true opinion. The word for ‘ wrestle” (abak) 
 is derived from abak, ‘‘ dust,” from the rolling 
 of athletes in the dust when wrestling with 
 each other. 
 
 until the breaking of the day] lit. ‘till the 
 rising of the dawn.” 
 
 25. when he saw that he prevailed not 
 against him| ‘There must have been some 
 deep significance in this wrestling, in which 
 an Angel, or more probably the God of 
 angels, Himself ‘‘the Angel of the Lorp,” 
 prevailed not against a man. ‘The difficulty 
 of believing that man could prevail against 
 God led to some forced interpretations, such 
 as that of Origen (‘ De Principiis,’ Lib. II1.), 
 and Jerome (‘in Epist. ad Ephes.’c. vI.), that 
 Jacob wrestled against evil spirits, and that 
 the ‘*‘ Man” is said to have wrestled with him 
 in the sense of assisting him, wrestling on his 
 side; an interpretation refuted by the words 
 of the ‘‘ Man” Himself in v. 28. The mys- 
 tical meaning of the whole transaction seems 
 probably to be of this kind. The time was 
 an important epoch in Jacob’s history. It 
 was a turning-point in his life. ‘There had 
 been much most faulty in his character ; 
 which had led him to much trouble, and sub- 
 jected him to a long penitential and reforma- 
 tory discipline. He was now returning after an 
 exile, of 20 or more probably 40 years, to the 
 land of his birth, which had been promised to 
 him for his inheritance. It was a great crisis. 
 Should he fall under the power of Esau and 
 so suffer to the utmost for his former sins? or 
 
 alaN Ey bois ge ely 
 
 hollow of Jacob’s thigh was out of 
 joint, as he wrestled with him. 
 
 26 And he said, Let me go, for the 
 
 not let thee go, except thou bless me. * 
 
 should he obtain mercy and be received back 
 to his father’s house as the heir of the pro- 
 mises? ‘This eventful night, this passage of 
 the Jabbok, was to decide; and the mys- 
 terious conflict, in which by Divine mercy 
 and strength he is permitted to prevail, is 
 vouchsafed to him as an indication that his 
 repentance, matured by long schooling and 
 discipline and manifested in fervent and hum- 
 ble prayer, is accepted with God and blessed 
 by the Son of God, whose ancestor in the 
 flesh he is now once more formally constituted. 
 
 the hollow of the thigh| ‘The socket of the 
 hip-joint, the hollow place like the palm of a 
 hand (Heb. Caph) into which the neck-bone of 
 the thigh is inserted. ‘The reason of this act 
 of the Angel was very probably lest Jacob 
 should be puffed up by the ‘‘abundance of the 
 revelations;”’ he might think that by his own 
 strength and not by grace he had prevailed 
 with God; as St Paul had the thorn in the 
 flesh sent to him lest he ‘‘should be exalted 
 above measure,” 2 Cor. xii. 7. (So Theodoret 
 in loc.). 
 
 26. Let me go, for the day breaketh) 
 Lit. ‘‘ for the dawn ariseth.” ‘The contest had 
 taken place during the later hours of the night. 
 It was now right that it should be ended: for 
 the time had arrived, the breaking of the day, 
 when Jacob must prepare to meet Esau and to 
 appease his anger. It was for Jacob’s sake, 
 not for His own convenience, that the Divine 
 wrestler desired to go. (So Abarbanel, Hei- 
 degger, &c. &c.). 
 
 except thou bless me] Jacob had plainly 
 discovered that his antagonist was a heavenly 
 Visitor. ‘Though he had been permitted to 
 prevail in the contest, he still desired blessing 
 for the future. 
 
 28. Israel: for as a prince hast thou power], 
 The verb Sarah and its cognate Sar sig- 
 nify ‘to contend with,” and also ‘‘to be a 
 prince or leader.” See Judg. ix. 22; Hos. xii. 4 
 (Ges. pp. 1326, 1338, Ros. in loc.). It is 
 quite possible that both senses are conveyed 
 by the word, and it might be rendered either, 
 ‘thou hast contended with God,” or ‘‘thou 
 hast been a prince with God.” ‘The Author- 
 ised Version combines both. ‘The best Vss., 
 LXX., Vulg., render, ‘‘ Thou hast had power 
 with God, and how much more wilt thou 
 prevail with men,” which has been followed 
 by many moderns, as Heidegger, Rosenm., 
 &c. The sense is thus rendered more perspi- 
 cuous, as implying a promise of safety from 
 
 181 
 
182 
 27 And he said unto him, What cs 
 thy name? And he said, Jacob. 
 ¢chap.35- " 28 And he said, * Thy name shall 
 ro.. ; 
 
 be called no more Jacob, but Israel: 
 for as a prince hast thou power with 
 God and with men, and hast pre- 
 vailed. 
 
 29 And Jacob asked hzm, and said, 
 Tell me, I pray thee, thy name. And 
 he said, Wherefore zs it that thou 
 dost ask after my name? And he 
 blessed him there. 
 
 30 And Jacob called the name of 
 
 IThatis, the place !'Peniel: for I have seen 
 “/*% God face to face, and my life is pre- 
 
 GEN ESISR 2 We ee ls 
 
 [v. 27—8. 
 
 ND Jacob lifted up his eyes, and 
 
 looked, and, behold, Esau came, 
 
 and with him four hundred men. And 
 
 he divided the children unto Leah, 
 
 and unto Rachel, and unto the two 
 handmaids. 
 
 2 And he put the handmaids and 
 their children foremost, and Leah and 
 her children after, and Rachel and 
 Joseph hindermost. 
 
 3 And he passed over before them, 
 and bowed himself to the ground 
 seven times, until he came near to 
 his brother. 
 
 4 And Esau ran to meet him, and 
 
 served. 
 
 31 And as he passed over Penuel 
 the sun rose upon him, and he halted 
 upon his thigh. 
 
 32 Therefore the children of Israel 
 eat not of the sinew which shrank, 
 which zs upon the hollow of the 
 thigh, unto this day: because he 
 touched the hollow of Jacob’s thigh 
 in the sinew that shrank. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 
 I The kindness of Facob and Esau at their 
 meeting. 147 Facob cometh to Succoth. 18 
 At Shalem he buyeth a field, and buildeth an 
 altar called El-elohe-Israel. 
 
 embraced him, and fell on his neck, 
 and kissed him: and they wept. 
 
 5 And he lifted up his eyes, and 
 saw the women and the children; 
 and said, Who are those t with thee? + Heb. 
 And he said, The children which God ” “?? 
 hath graciously given thy servant. 
 
 6 Then the handmaidens came 
 near, they and their children, and 
 they bowed themselves. 
 
 7 And Leah also with her children 
 came near, and bowed themselves: 
 and after came Joseph near and Ra- i Heb. 
 
 chel, and they bowed themselves. Weg rdos 
 
 all thts 
 8 And he said, ‘What meanest thou 22%,” 
 
 thee ? 
 
 —————— eee ee SS EEE 
 
 Esau. The difficulty, however, of thus ex- 
 plaining the particle Vaw before ‘hast pre- 
 vailed” is great. 
 
 29. Wherefore is it that thou dost ask 
 after my name?| Comp. Judg. xiii. 18, ‘And 
 the Angel of the Lord said unto him (i.e. 
 Manoah), Why askest thou after my name 
 seeing it is secret?” lit. ‘“‘ wonderful.” In the 
 present instance perhaps the words mean, 
 “Why dost thou ask my name? as it may be 
 plain to you who I am.” 
 
 30, Peniel] i.e. ** the face of God.” Else- 
 where it is always Penuel, and the Samaritan 
 Pentateuch and the Vulg. have Penuel here. 
 The LXX, does not give this name itself, 
 but translates it both here and in v. 31. Jose- 
 phus has Phanuel only. ‘The words only dif- 
 fer by a single line in one letter, and have no 
 difference of meaning. Strabo (‘ Geogr.’ L. 
 XVI. c, 2, §§ 15, 18) mentions a town among 
 the Phcenician cities with a Greek name of the 
 same meaning, viz. Theou prosopon. 
 
 32. the sinew which shrank| This is 
 the rendering of LXX., Vulg., Onk. Many 
 Jewish and Christian commentators have ren- 
 dered it ‘‘the nerve of contraction” or ‘the 
 
 nerve of oblivion.” Whatever be the literal 
 sense of the words, they doubtless mean the 
 ‘* sciatic nerve,” the nervus ischiadicus, which 
 is one of the largest in the body, and extends 
 down the thigh and leg to the ankle. The 
 Arabs still use this same word (Nasheh or 
 Naseh) to designate the sciatic nerve (see Ros. 
 in loc,, Ges. ‘hes,’ p. 924). ‘The cuss 
 tom prevailing among the Jews to this day of 
 abstaining religiously from eating this sinew 
 seems a lasting monument of the historical 
 truth of this wonderful event in the life of 
 Jacob, 
 
 CHAP. XXXIII. 3. bowed himself to the 
 Sround| A deep oriental bow, not probably 
 such profound prostration as is expressed in ch. 
 xix. 1: ‘+*he bowed himself with his face to 
 the ground.” 
 
 5. Who are those with thee?| Lit. ‘to 
 thee;” z.e. that thou hast. 
 
 8. What meanest thou by all this drove} 
 Lit. ‘‘ What to thee is all this camp?” ‘The 
 Sheep with their shepherds assumed the ap- 
 pearance of a band or troop, hence called 
 ‘* camp,” 
 
t Heb. 
 
 be that to 
 thee that 
 is thine. 
 
 v. 9—18. | 
 
 by all this drove which I met? And 
 he said, These are to find grace in the 
 sight of my lord. 
 
 g And Esau said, I have enough, 
 my brother; ‘keep that thou hast 
 unto thyself. 
 
 10 And Jacob said, Nay, I pray 
 thee, if now I have found grace in 
 thy sight, then receive my present at 
 my hand: for therefore I have seen 
 thy face, as though I had seen the 
 face of God, and thou wast pleased 
 with me. 
 
 11 Take, I pray thee, my blessing 
 that is brought to thee; because God 
 hath dealt graciously with me, and 
 because I have enough. And he 
 urged him, and he took 7t. 
 
 12 And he said, Let us take our 
 journey, and let us go, and I will go 
 before thee. 
 
 13 And he said unto him, My 
 lord knoweth that the children are 
 
 NES DSe A XEN TTA. 
 
 183 
 
 tender, and the flocks and herds with 
 young are with me: and if men should 
 overdrive them one day, all the flock 
 will die. 
 14 Let my lord, I pray thee, pass 
 over before his servant: and I will 
 lead on softly, ‘according as the cattle + Heb. 
 that goeth before me and the children cays 
 
 : to the foot 
 be able to endure, until I come unto %“#e 
 
 : work, &¢. 
 my lord unto Seir. and ac- 
 15 And Esau said, Let me now Gene ie 
 
 leave with thee some of the folk that #4" 
 are with me. And he said, ‘What tHeb. see, 
 
 needeth it? let me find grace in the Pete 
 sight of my lord. eee 8S 
 
 16 {| So Esau returned that day on 
 his way unto Seir. 
 17 And Jacob journeyed to Suc- 
 coth, and built him an house, and 
 made booths for his cattle: therefore 
 the name of the place is called 'Suc- 1 Thatis, 
 coth. booths. 
 18 @ And Jacob came to Shalem, 
 
 10. for therefore I have seen thy face, 
 &c.] Rather ‘‘for I have seen thy face, as 
 though I had seen the face of God.” ‘The same 
 particles are rendered ‘‘ because,” Gen. XXXVIil. 
 26; ‘¢forasmuch as,” Num. x. 31; ‘¢ because,” 
 Num. xiv. 43 (see Ges. ‘Thes.’ p. 682). Ja- 
 cob pleads as a reason why Esau should accept 
 his present, that Esau’s face had seemed as 
 gracious and favourable to him as though it 
 had been God’s face. It is highly probable 
 that Jacob here refers to his vision of God in 
 the night past at Peniel. ‘The words he uses 
 are ‘‘for I have seen thy face, like a vision 
 of Peney El-ohim,” i.e. ‘the face of God.” It 
 might have seemed likely that Jacob on his 
 meeting with Esau would use the special name 
 of their father’s God, JEHOVAH; but this, in 
 addition to the reason given above, would have 
 been like claiming to be the heir of the pro- 
 mises and under the peculiar care of JEHO- 
 vAu, which would have been very offensive to 
 Esau. 
 
 11. my blessing] That is, ‘‘this gift 
 which is meant to express good will and affec- 
 tion, offered with prayers for blessing on the 
 recipient” (cp. Judg.i.15; 1S. xxv. 32, XXX, 
 26; 2 K. v.15). 
 
 T have enough] Lit. ‘I have all.” 
 
 13. with young| In milk. 
 
 __ if men should overdrive them one day| Esau’s 
 4oo horsemen would be likely to move too 
 rapidly for the milch cattle. 
 
 14. according as the cattle that goeth 
 
 before me and the children be able to endure] 
 According to the pace (lit. ‘‘the foot’’) 
 of the cattle thatis before me, and ac- 
 cording to the pace of the children. 
 The word for cattle is literally ‘‘work;” thence 
 anything acquired by labour, property, and 
 hence cattle, the chief possession of a pastoral 
 people. 
 
 until I come unto my lord unto Seir] It is 
 probable that Jacob here intimated a hope that 
 he might one day visit Esau at Seir. It does 
 not necessarily mean that he was directly on 
 his way thither; his course being evidently to- 
 wards Shechem. | 
 
 17. booths} Perhaps only wattled en- 
 closures, or very possibly some simple con- 
 trivance of branches and leaves made for 
 sheltering the milch cattle from the heat of 
 the sun. 
 
 Succoth] ‘‘Booths,” from saccac, to entwine, 
 to shelter. Jacob could easily visit his father 
 from this place. Jerome (‘Qu. Heb.’ ad h.1.) 
 says that ‘‘ Sochoth is to this day a city beyond 
 Jordan in Scythopolis.” According to Josh. 
 xiii, 27, Judg. viii. 4, 5, Succoth was in the 
 valley of the Jordan, ‘‘on the other side of the 
 Jordan eastward,” and was allotted to the 
 tribe of Gad. 
 
 18. to Shalem] Or ‘‘in peace.” ‘The 
 LXX., Vulg., Syr. render ‘‘ Shalem.” Robin- 
 son (‘ B. R.’ 111. 322) and Wilson (‘Lands of 
 the Bible,’ 11. 72) mention a place still called 
 Salim to the east of Nablus. On the other 
 hand the Sam. Pent. has Shalom, i.e, ** safe.” 
 
184 
 WCalled, a city of 'Shechem, which 7s in the 
 cae ns land of Canaan, when he came from 
 Padan-aram ; and pitched his tent 
 before the city. 
 19 And he bought a parcel of a 
 field, where he had spread his tent, 
 'Called, at the hand of the children of 'Ha- 
 Boney? mor, Shechem’s father, for an hundred 
 1 Or, ' pieces of money. 
 eo 20 And he erected there an altar, 
 I That is, and called it ' El-elohe-Israel. 
 ea CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 
 1 Dinah ts ravished by Shechem. 4 He sueth 
 to marry her. 13 The sons of Jacob offer the 
 condition of circumcision to the Shechenvites. 
 20 Hamor and Shechem persuade them to 
 accept it. 25 The sons of Facob upon that 
 advantage slay them, 27 and spoil their city. 
 30 Facob reproveth Simeon and Levi. 
 
 ND Dinah the daughter of Leah, 
 aN which she bare unto Jacob, went 
 out to see the daughters of the land. 
 
 2 And when Shechem the son of 
 
 GENESTSOA 2 XC Oe lve 
 
 [v. 19—7. 
 Hamor the Hivite, prince of the 
 country, saw her, he took her, and 
 
 lay with her, and ‘defiled her. 
 
 the daughter of Jacob, and he loved 
 
 t Heb. 
 : . humbled 
 3 And his soul clave unto Dinah Zep, 
 
 — 
 
 tL t Heb. zo 
 the damsel, and spake ‘kindly unto Baye 
 
 the damsel. 
 
 4 And Shechem spake unto his fa- 
 ther Hamor, saying, Get me this dam- 
 sel to wife. 
 
 5 And Jacob heard that he had de- 
 filed Dinah his daughter: now his 
 sons were with his cattle in the field: 
 and Jacob held his peace until they 
 were come. 
 
 6 4 And Hamor the father of She- 
 chem went out unto Jacob to com- 
 mune with him. 
 
 7 And the sons of Jacob came out 
 of the field when they heard i#: and 
 the men were grieved, and they were 
 very wroth, because he had wrought 
 
 Onkelos renders ‘‘in peace,” and he is follow- 
 ed by Saadias, Rashi and most Jewish com- 
 mentators, by Rosenm., Schum, Gesen., 
 Tuch, Del., Knobel, Keil. 
 
 a city of Shechem] If instead of ‘‘ to Sha- 
 lem” we adopt the rendering ‘in peace,” or 
 ‘‘in safety ;” then we must render here “tu 
 the city of Shechem.” It was perhaps called 
 after Shechem the son of Hamor (y. 19). In 
 ch. xii. 6 (where see note), we read of ‘the 
 place of Sichem,” i.e. perhaps the site on 
 which Sichem or Shechem was afterwards built, 
 It was the first place in which God appeared 
 to Abraham, and it is the place at which 
 
 Jacob re-enters the promised land; for Suc- 
 
 coth, whence he came to it, was on the other 
 side of Jordan. Abraham only purchased a 
 burial-place, Jacob purchases a dwelling-place. 
 Perhaps the country had now become more 
 fully inhabited, and therefore land must be 
 secured before it could be safely lived upon. 
 
 19. an hundred pieces of money] ‘*A hun- 
 dred Kesita.” All the ancient Versions (except 
 Targg. Jerus. and Jonath.) render ‘¢a hun- 
 dred lambs,” whence it has been inferred that 
 the Kesita was a piece of money bearing the 
 impression of a lamb. It appears however to 
 have been either an ingot or bar of silver of 
 certain weight, or perhaps merely a certain 
 weight of silver; a word of the same root in 
 Arabic signifying ‘‘a balance,” ‘a pair of 
 scales.” (See Ges. ‘Thes.’ p. 1241. Lee, ‘Lex.’ 
 in voc.). 
 
 20. l-elohe-Israel] ‘The name Israel 
 contains in it the syllable Z/, one of the names 
 
 of God. Jacob therefore calls E/ the God of 
 Israel, and gives this title to the altar, which 
 he built on the spot which had already been 
 consecrated by Abraham (ch. xii. 7). Jacob 
 had hitherto always spoken of JEHOVAH as 
 the God of Abraham, and the God, or the 
 Fear, of his father Isaac. Now on his gra- 
 cious acceptance by Him, his change of name 
 by His appointment, his return to Canaan as 
 the heir of the land, he calls Him his own 
 God, El, the God of Israel. 
 
 CHAP. XXXIV. 1. Dinah the daughter 
 of Leah] Her birth is mentioned (ch. xxx. 
 21) before the birth of Joseph (vy, 22, 23). 
 If Jacob’s sojourn in Padan-aram was 40 
 years long and not 20 only (see note at the 
 end of ch. xxxi.), it is quite possible that Dinah 
 may have been some years older than Joseph, 
 who was 17 at the beginning of the history 
 related in ch. xxxvii. (see v. 2), i.e. probably 
 about a year or two after the events related in 
 this present chapter. In any case therefore 
 she was not less than 15 years old at this time, 
 supposing her to have been no older than 
 Joseph; so that the objection urged by Tuch 
 and others that at this time she was but 6 or 7 
 years old cannot be maintained. 
 
 qwent out to see the daughters of the land| 
 Josephus (‘ Ant.’ 1, 21) states that a feast 
 among the Shechemites was the occasion of 
 this visit. 
 
 3. spake kindly unto the damsel] Lit, 
 ‘* Spake to the heart of the damsel.” So ch. 1. 
 21; Judg, xix. 3; Isa. xl. 2; Hos. ii. 14, &c. 
 
 7. be had wrought folly in Israel...which 
 
v. 8—25.] 
 
 folly in Israel in lying with Jacob’s 
 daughter; which thing ought not to 
 be done. 
 
 8. And Hamor communed with 
 them, saying, The soul of my son 
 Shechem longeth for your daughter: 
 I pray you give her him to wife. 
 
 g And make ye marriages with us, 
 and give your daughters unto us, and 
 take our daughters unto you. 
 
 1o And ye shall dwell with us: 
 and the land shall be before you; dwell 
 and trade ye therein, and get you pos- 
 sessions therein. 
 
 11 And Shechem said unto her fa- 
 ther and unto her brethren, Let me 
 find grace in your eyes, and what ye 
 shall say unto me I will give. 
 
 12 Ask me never so much dowry 
 and gift, and I will give according as 
 ye shall say unto me: but give me 
 the damsel to wife. 
 
 13 And the sons of Jacob answered 
 Shechem and Hamor his father de- 
 ceitfully, and said, because he had 
 
 _ defiled Dinah their sister : 
 
 14 And they said unto them, We 
 cannot do this thing, to give our sister 
 to one that is uncircumcised; for that 
 were a reproach unto us: 
 
 15 But in this will we consent un- 
 to you: If ye will be as we e, that 
 every male of you be circumcised ; 
 
 16 Then will we give our daugh- 
 ters unto you, and we will take your 
 daughters to us, and we will dwell 
 
 - with you, and we will become one 
 people. 
 
 thing ought not to be done| Lit. ‘*and so 
 it is not done.” ‘These are not the words 
 of the sons of Jacob, but of the sacred histo- 
 tian. It is not likely that the family of Jacob 
 should by this time have acquired the generic 
 name of Israel; but Moses uses the designa- 
 tion which had become familiar in his own 
 day. ‘The words of this verse seem to have 
 become proverbial, they are almost repeated 
 in 2S. xiii, 12. But this is no reason for 
 supposing that the words of this present verse 
 should be ascribed to a later hand than that of 
 ‘Moses. 
 
 _ 18. and said] Schultens, Gesen. (p. 315), 
 Knobel, Del., &c. translate here ‘‘and plotted” 
 or ‘laid snares:” others repeat the word ‘‘ de- 
 
 Caos ol peek LV; 
 
 17 But if ye will not hearken un- 
 to us, to be circumcised; then will 
 we take our daughter, and we will be 
 
 one. 
 
 18 And their words pleased Hamor, 
 and Shechem Hamor’s son. 
 
 1g And the young man deferred 
 not to do the thing, because he had 
 delight in Jacob’s daughter: and he 
 was more honourable than all the 
 house of his father. 
 
 20 4 And Hamor and Shechem his 
 son came unto the gate of their city, 
 and communed with the men of their 
 city, saying, 
 
 21 ‘hese men are peaceable with 
 us; therefore let them dwell in the 
 land, and trade therein; for the land, 
 behold, zt zs large enough for them; 
 let us take their daughters to us for 
 wives, and let us give them our 
 daughters. 
 
 22 Only herein will the men con- 
 sent unto us for to dwell with us, to 
 be one people, if every male among 
 us be circumcised, as they are cir- 
 cumcised. 
 
 23 Shall not their cattle and their 
 substance and every beast of theirs de. 
 ours? only let us consent unto them, 
 and they will dwell with us. 
 
 24 And unto Hamor and unto She- 
 chem his son hearkened all that went 
 out of the gate of his city; and every 
 male was circumcised, all that went 
 out of the gate of his city. 
 
 25 And it came to pass on the 
 third day, when they were sore, that 
 
 ceitfully” from the former clause, rendering 
 and ‘spoke deceitfully:” but the rendering 
 of the Authorised Version seems preferable. 
 
 18. their words pleased Hamor, &c.] 
 The readiness of the Shechemites to submit to 
 circumcision may be accounted for, if circum- 
 cision had by this time become a rite known 
 to others besides the descendants of Abraham 
 (Herod. 11. 104). At all events, it was now 
 practised not only by the sons of Jacob and 
 his household, but by the Ishmaelites, and 
 the family and household of Esau, all growing 
 into important tribes in the neighbourhood of 
 the Shechemites. 
 
 25. Simeon and Levi, Dinah’s brethren, 
 took each man his sword] i.e. sons of the same 
 
186 
 
 two of the sons of Jacob, Simeon and 
 Levi, Dinah’s brethren, took each man 
 his sword, and came upon the city 
 
 Sievers 49. boldly, and “slew all the males. 
 
 26 And they slew Hamor and She- 
 chem his son with the ‘edge of the 
 sword, and took Dinah out of She- 
 chem’s house, and went out. 
 
 27 The sons of Jacob came upon 
 the slain, and spoiled the city, because 
 they had defiled their sister. 
 
 28 They took their sheep, and their 
 oxen, and their asses, and that which 
 was in the city, and that which was 
 in the field, 
 
 29 And all their wealth, and all 
 their little ones, and their wives took 
 they captive, and spoiled even all that 
 was in the house. 
 
 30 And Jacob said to Simeon and 
 Levi, Ye have troubled me to make 
 me to stink among the inhabitants of 
 the land, among the Canaanites and 
 the Perizzites: and I being few in 
 number, they shall gather themselves 
 
 mother, Leah, as well as of the same father, 
 Jacob. In ch, xxiv. 50, 55, &c. we saw La- 
 ban taking a principal part in giving his sister 
 in marriage Michaelis (in loc.) mentions it as 
 a prevalent opinion in the East that a man is 
 more affected by the dishonour of his sister 
 than even by the dishonour of his wife, as he 
 may divorce his wife but can never cease to be 
 his sister’s brother, We are not to suppose 
 that Simeon and Levi without help from others 
 attacked and slew all the males: they had no 
 doubt a retinue from their father’s household 
 with them, and perhaps were accompanied by 
 some of their brothers, though they only are 
 specially mentioned, as having taken the lead 
 in the assault, and as most strongly actuated 
 by the spirit of revenge. 
 
 27. the sons of Jacob) i.e. others be- 
 side Simeon and Levi, for all appear to have 
 joined in the original stratagem (see v. 13), 
 and probably all assisted in spoiling the city. 
 
 30. I being few in number] Lit. “I 
 being men of number.” ‘That is, I and my 
 family and followers (compare ‘‘I am become 
 two bands,” ch. xxxli. 10) are men so few 
 that we can easily be numbered. A common 
 idiom: see Deut. iv. 27; 1 Chr. xvi. 19; Ps, 
 CY, 12+ 18ai-Kesrgs) Jer. Rliv, 28, 
 
 It seems strange that Jacob should have 
 reproached his sons as having brought him 
 into danger, not as having been guilty of 
 
 GENESIS AXA IY Pee ea 
 
 [v. 26—3, 
 
 together against me, and slay me; and 
 I shall be destroyed, I and my house. 
 31 And they said, Should he deal 
 
 with our sister as with an harlot? 
 
 CHAPTER XXXV. 
 
 I God sendeth Facob to Beth-el. 2 He purgeth 
 his house of idols. 6 He buildeth an altar at 
 Beth-el. 8 Deborah dieth at Allon-bachuth. 
 9 God blesseth Facob at Beth-el. 16 Rachel 
 travaileth of Benjamin, and dieth in the way 
 to Edar. 22 Reuben lieth with Bilhah. 23 
 Lhe sons of Facob. 27 Facob cometh to Isaac 
 . flebron, 28 The age, death, and burial of 
 
 SAAC. 
 
 ND God said unto Jacob, Arise, 
 go upto Beth-el, and dwell there : 
 and make there an altar unto God, 
 
 that appeared unto thee “when thou «chap. 27 
 
 fleddest from the face of Esau thy 4 
 brother. 
 
 2, Then Jacob said unto his house- 
 hold, and to all that were with him, 
 Put away the strange gods that are 
 among you, and be clean, and change 
 your garments: 
 
 3 And let us arise, and go up to 
 
 treachery and murder. ‘This is only another 
 instance of Jacob’s weak character, and of the 
 fidelity of the historian. Jacob’s own fault 
 was want of straightforward honesty. It is 
 reproduced with grievous aggravations in his 
 sons. ‘The timidity of his disposition, a kin- 
 dred defect with untruthfulness, shews itself 
 now in his exclamation of fear rather than of 
 moral horror. His more righteous indigna- 
 tion, the result of calmer thought, is expressed 
 in his final judgment on the fierceness of their 
 anger and the cruelty of their wrath (ch. xlix, 
 
 5, 6, 7) 
 
 CHAP. XXXV.1. Beth-eJ] See on ch, 
 XXVill. 19. 
 
 2. strange gods| Not only had Rachel 
 stolen her father’s teraphim, but probably 
 others of Jacob’s company had secreted in- 
 struments of idolatrous worship in the camp. 
 As they had just spoiled a heathen city (ch. 
 XXXIV. 2.7), it is not unlikely that they brought 
 such instruments from that also. 
 
 be clean| ‘‘Purify yourselves.” The same 
 word is frequently used under the Law for 
 purification from legal uncleanness before 
 access to sacred ordinances (Lev. xiv. 4; Num. 
 viii. 7; 2 Chr, xxx. 18; Ezra vi. 203 Neh. xii, 
 30}; Xlil. 22). Such purification was proba- 
 bly in the patriarchal times, as often even 
 under the law, by washing merely, all such 
 
Vv. 4—11.] CAEN S LS FEA AUS: 187 
 
 Beth-el; and I will make there an 
 altar unto God, who answered me in 
 the day of my distress, and was with 
 me in the way which I went. 
 
 4 And they gave unto Jacob all the 
 strange gods which were in their hand, 
 and all their earrings which were in 
 their ears; and Jacob hid them under 
 the oak which was by Shechem. 
 
 5 And they journeyed: and the 
 terror of God was upon the cities that 
 were round about them, and they did 
 not pursue after the sons of Jacob. 
 
 6 4 So Jacob came to Luz, which 
 zs in the land of Canaan, that zs, 
 Beth-el, he and all the people that 
 were with him. 
 
 7 And he built there an altar, and 
 
 ceremonial washings being the prototypes of 
 baptism, by which, false religions being re- 
 jected, men are brought into the Church of 
 the living God. 
 
 4. ear-rings| perhaps talismans or idola- 
 trous symbols worn in the ear. Augus- 
 tine (‘Qu.’ ad h. 1.) calls them ‘‘idolatrous 
 phylacteries,” ¢dolorum phylacteria, and (‘ Epist.’ 
 CCXLV.) he mentions a superstitious use of ear- 
 rings even in his own day among the African 
 Christians ‘‘not to please men but to serve 
 demons.” 
 
 the oak which was by Shechem| See 
 note on ch. xii. 6. It may have been under 
 the very oak, or oak-grove, where Abraham 
 pitched his tent, and which seems to have 
 been sacred even in Joshua’s time (Josh. xxiv. 
 26). 
 
 5. the terror of God] God inspired 
 into the minds of the neighbouring tribes a 
 sense of fear, so that they did not pursue 
 Jacob in order to avenge the slaughter of the 
 Shechemites. 
 
 6. Luz] See ch. xxviii. 19. 
 
 7, £El-beth-el] i.e. ‘the God of Beth- 
 el,” or “the God of the House of God.” 
 At Bethel God first appeared to him. ‘Then 
 he devoted himself to God’s service and re- 
 ceived the promises of God’s protection. He 
 accordingly called the place Bethel, which 
 name he now renews with addition of E/. 
 
 God appeared unto him| ‘The word for 
 God, ‘‘Elohim,” being here as generally in the 
 plural, the verb is by a kind of attraction put 
 in the plural also. Some have discovered in 
 this a relic of polytheism, and Onkelos has 
 rendered angels, a most unwarrantable trans- 
 lation. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the 
 
 called the place 'El]-beth-el: because ? chap. 28. 
 there God appeared unto him, when i%hatis, 
 he fled from the face of his brother, #4,Go? of 
 8 But Deborah Rebekah’s nurse 
 died, and she was buried beneath 
 Beth-el under an oak: and the name 
 of it was called 'Allon-bachuth. 1 That is, 
 g {| And God appeared unto Jacob Oe oe ce 
 again, when he came out of Padan- 
 aram, and blessed him. 
 10 And God said unto him, Thy 
 name is Jacob: thy name shall not be 
 called any more Jacob, “but Israel «chap. 32. 
 shall be thy name: and he called his ** 
 name Israel. 
 1r And God said unto him, I am 
 God Almighty: be fruitful and mul- 
 
 tiply ; a nation and a company of na- 
 
 iS) 
 
 LXX. and Vulg. Versions have the verb in 
 the singular, which may be the true reading; 
 but see on ch. xx. 13, 
 
 8. Allon-bachuth] ‘‘'The oak of weeping.” 
 
 9. God appeared unto ‘facob again, when 
 he came out of Padan-aram| He was now at 
 Bethel, the place from which he may be con- 
 sidered to have set out for Padan-aram, and 
 where he made his vow that if God would 
 be with him and be his God, he would make 
 that place the house of God. He had now 
 come back again to the same spot; he had 
 fulfilled his vow by consecrating Bethel as the 
 temple of God; this might then well be con- 
 sidered as the accomplishment of his return 
 from Padan-aram. Accordingly God ap- 
 pears to him here once more, promises him 
 again, and more emphatically, protection, 
 blessing, inheritance, confirms the name of 
 Israel to him, a name given by the angel at 
 the ford of the brook Jabbok, but now fixed 
 and ratified, and assures him that his posterity 
 shall be numerous, powerful and_ blessed. 
 Accordingly Jacob, recognizing the fulfilment 
 of all that had been promised him when he 
 fled from Esau, and of all that his vows had 
 pointed to, rears again a stone pillar as he had 
 done forty years before, and again solemnly 
 names the place Bethel. ‘The whole of this 
 history thoroughly fits in to all that has gone 
 before, there being nothing whatever to sup- 
 port the notion that it is a mere legendary 
 repetition of the previous vision. 
 
 11. I am God Almighty]  El-Shadda. 
 It was by this name that God revealed Him- 
 self to Abram, when he changed his name to 
 Abraham, and promised him the land of 
 Canaan for an everlasting possession (see ch. 
 xvii. 8). The use of the same name here is 
 
138 
 
 t Heb. 
 a little 
 piece of 
 
 Lrouna, 
 
 That is, 
 
 the son of 
 
 tions shall be of thee, and kings shall 
 come out of thy loins; 
 
 12 And the land which I gave 
 Abraham and Isaac, to thee I will 
 give it, and to thy seed after thee will 
 I give the land. 
 
 13, And God went up from him in 
 the place where he talked with him. 
 
 14 And Jacob set up a pillar in the 
 place where he talked with him, even 
 a pillar of stone: and he poured a 
 drink offering thereon, and he poured 
 oil thereon. 
 
 15 And Jacob called the name of 
 the place where God spake with him, 
 Beth-el. 
 
 16 4 And they journeyed from 
 Beth-el; and there was but ‘a little 
 way to come to Ephrath: and Rachel 
 travailed, and she had hard labour. 
 
 17 And it came to pass, when she 
 was in hard labour, that the midwife 
 said unto her, Fear not; thou shalt 
 have this son also. 
 
 18 And it came to pass, as her soul 
 was in departing, (for she died) that 
 
 my SOr- B a 
 vow. _ she called his name 'Ben-oni: but 
 | That is, ; ‘ l : : 
 
 the son of his father called him ' Benjamin. 
 
 the right 
 hand. 
 
 1g And Rachel died, and was bu- 
 
 therefore singularly appropriate, and Jacob 
 refers to it with evident comfort and satisfac- 
 tion at the close of his life (see ch. xlviil. 3). 
 
 16. a little way| ‘These words pro- 
 bably in the original denote a definite space. 
 The LXX. does not translate the principal 
 word. ‘The Vulg. improperly renders ‘‘in the 
 Spring time.” Onk. has ‘‘an acre of land;” 
 the Syr. ‘‘a parasang;” Saad. and Arab. 
 Erpen. ‘‘a mile.” ‘The Jews generally incline 
 to understand ‘‘a mile,” because of the tra- 
 ditions that Rachel’s tomb was a mile from 
 Bethlehem or Ephrath (v. 19). 
 
 18. Ben-oni] i.e. ‘son of my sorrow.” 
 
 Benjamin] i.e. ‘son of the right hand,” a 
 name of good significance, the right hand 
 being connected with prosperity, as the left 
 hand was with calamity. Some ancient ver- 
 sions (favoured by the Samaritan Pentateuch) 
 interpret Benjamin as ‘‘son of days,” z.e. 
 ‘¢son of old age.” ‘There is evidently, how- 
 ever, an antithesis between Benoni, ‘‘son of 
 sorrow,” and Benjamin, ‘‘son of prosperity.” 
 It might possibly be interpreted ‘‘son of 
 strength,” from the ‘‘strong right hand.” 
 
 20. unto this day| i.e. till Moses wrote. 
 It was worthy of notice that the pillar still 
 
 GENESIS. XXXV. 
 
 [v. 12—27; 
 
 ried in the way to Ephrath, which zs 
 Beth-lehem. 
 
 20 And Jacob seta pillar upon her 
 grave: that zs the pillar of Rachel’s 
 grave unto this day. 
 
 21 @ And Israel journeyed, and 
 spread his tent beyond the tower of 
 Edar. 
 
 22 And it came to pass, when Is- 
 rael dwelt in that land, that Reuben 
 
 went and “lay with Bilhah his fa- @ chap. 49, 
 
 ther’s concubine: and Israel heard zt. * 
 Now the sons of Jacob were twelve: 
 
 23 The sons of Leah; Reuben, 
 Jacob’s firstborn, and Simeon, and 
 Levi, and Judah, and Issachar, and 
 Zebulun: 
 
 24 The sons of Rachel; Joseph, 
 and Benjamin: 
 
 25 And the sons of Bilhah, Rachel’s 
 handmaid; Dan, and Naphtali: 
 
 26 And the sons of Zilpah, Leah’s 
 handmaid; Gad, and Asher: these 
 are the sons of Jacob, which were - 
 born to him in Padan-aram, 
 
 27 4 And Jacob came unto Isaac 
 his father unto Mamre, unto the city 
 of Arbah, which zs Hebron, where 
 Abraham and Isaac sojourned. 
 
 stood after the land had been so long inhabit- 
 ed by unfriendly tribes. On the knowledge 
 of the geography of Palestine by Moses, see 
 Introduction to the Pentateuch, p. 17. 
 
 21. tower of Edar] i.e. ‘tower of the 
 flock.” It was apparently a watch-tower for 
 the protection of flocks against robbers and 
 wild beasts. (Cp. 2 K. xviii. 8; 2 Chr. xxvi. 
 IO, XXVil. 4.) 
 
 22. Reuben] ‘The incest of Reuben is 
 punished by his being deprived of his right of 
 primogeniture, ch. xlix. 3, 4; 1 Chr. v. 3. 
 
 and Israel heard it| ‘The LXX. adds 
 ‘and it was evil in his sight.” ‘The silence 
 of the Hebrew expresses more eloquently the 
 indignation of the offended patriarch. 
 
 26. in Padan-aram| i.e. except Ben- 
 jamin, whose birth has just been recorded in 
 Canaan (v. 18). 
 
 27. Jacob came unto Isaac his father] 
 Whether this was just before Isaac’s death, 
 or whether Jacob spent some time at Mamre 
 with his father, we do not read. If this were 
 only just before his death it is very probable 
 that Jacob had visited him from time to time 
 before, 
 
v. 28—13.] GEN BS ot ao Seow Va eX VT. 189 
 28 And the days of Isaac were an 
 : hundred and fourscore years. 
 
 | 29 And Isaac gave up the ghost, 
 sap. 25. and died, and “was gathered unto his 
 people, being old and full of days: and 
 
 his sons Esau and Jacob buried him. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVI. 
 
 1 Esau’s three wives. 6 His removing to mount 
 Seir. 9 His sons. 15 The dukes which de- 
 scended of his sons. 20 The sons and dukes of 
 Seir. 24 Anah findeth mules. 31 The kings 
 of Edom. 40 The dukes that descended of 
 Lsau. 
 
 his sons, and his daughters, and all 
 the t persons of his house, and his cat- t Heb. 
 tle, and all his beasts, and all his” 
 substance, which he had got in the 
 land of Canaan; and went into the 
 country from the face of his brother 
 Jacob. 
 
 7 For their riches were more than 
 that they might dwell together; and 
 the land wherein they were strangers 
 could not bear them because of their 
 cattle. 
 
 8 Thus dwelt Esau in ?mount Seir: ¢ Josh. 24. 
 Esau zs Edom. a4 
 
 q And these are the generations 
 
 of Esau the father of ‘the Edomites + Heb. 
 in mount Seir: mak 
 
 OW these are the generations 
 of Esau, who zs Edom. 
 - 2 Esau took his wives of the daugh- 
 
 x Chron. 
 P35; 
 
 ters of Canaan; Adah the daughter 
 of Elon the Hittite, and Aholibamah 
 the daughter of Anah the daughter 
 of Zibeon the Hivite ; 
 
 3, And Bashemath Ishmael’s daugh- 
 ter, sister of Nebajoth. 
 
 4 And “Adah bare to Esau Eli- 
 phaz; and Bashemath bare Reuel; 
 
 5 And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and 
 Jaalam, and Korah: these are the 
 sons of Esau, which were born unto 
 him in the land of Canaan. 
 
 6 And Esau took his wives, and 
 
 Gap, XXXVI. 2,8. Adab, &c.] See 
 note A at the end of the Chapter. 
 
 6. went into the country] Lit. ‘into 
 a land.” Onk. and Vulg. has ‘into another 
 land.” ‘The Sam. Pentat. has ‘‘ from the land 
 of Canaan.” The LXX. “from the land.” 
 The Syr. reads ‘into the land of Seir,” which 
 is adopted by Ewald, Knobel, Delitzsch, Keil, 
 &c. Inch. xxxii. 3, Esau is mentioned as in 
 the land of Seir, but then probably he was 
 only there for a time, perhaps engaged in its 
 conquest, now he finally takes up his abode 
 there. See note on xxxil. 3. 
 
 7. the land wherein they were strangers 
 could not bear them because of their cattle] 
 They were not settled inhabitants, but only 
 sojourners in the land: and though they were 
 allowed to pasture their flocks in the land, yet 
 it was not to be expected that the settled in- 
 habitants would tolerate more than a reason- 
 able number of cattle from one family to ea 
 up the produce of their fields. 
 
 8. mount Seir] Mount Seir was the 
 mountainous country between the Dead Sea 
 and the Elamitic Gulf, the northern part of 
 which is called Jebal, i.e. ‘¢the hill country,” 
 by the Arabs. So the Targums of Jerusalem 
 
 10 These are the names of Esau’s 
 
 SONS 5 ¢ Eliphaz the son of Adah the «1 Chron. 
 wife of Esau, Reuel the son of Bashe- * *” are 
 
 math the wife of Esau. 
 
 11 And the sons of Eliphaz were 
 Teman, Omar, Zepho, and Gatam, 
 and Kenaz. 
 
 12 And Timna was concubine to 
 Eliphaz Esau’s son; and she bare to 
 Eliphaz Amalek: these were the sons 
 of Adah Esau’s wife. 
 
 13 And these are the sons of Reu- 
 
 and Pseudo-Jonathan put here Gabala for 
 Seir, ‘The southern part is called Sherah. 
 
 9. the father of the Edomites| Lit. ‘the 
 father of Edom,” 7.e. either ‘‘ the father of the 
 Edomites,” or ‘‘ the founder of Idumza.” 
 
 11. Zeman] We read elsewhere of a dis- 
 trict in Idumza called Teman, famous for its 
 wisdom (Jer. xlix. 7, 20; Amos i. 12; Hab. 
 iii. 3); and in Job we meet with Eliphaz the 
 Temanite, probably descended from this Te- 
 man, the son of Eliphaz, the son of Esau. 
 Pliny (‘H. N.’ vi. 32) speaks of the Thima- 
 nei in connection with Petra. 
 
 Omar] is compared by Knobel with the 
 Beni Ammer in Southern Palestine and Nor- 
 thern Idumza, and with the Amarin Arabs 
 and the Amir Arabs, all mentioned by Seet- 
 zen, Burckhardt, and Robinson. 
 
 Zepho| Compare Zaphia, a place to the 
 south of the Dead Sea (Knobel). 
 
 Kenaz| Compare Aneizeh, the name of an 
 Arab tribe, and of a fortress to the north-east 
 of Petra (Knobel). 
 
 12. Amalek] ‘The ancestor of the Ama- 
 lekites, who probably at an early period sepa- 
 rated themselves from the rest of the Edom- 
 
190 
 
 el; Nahath, and Zerah, Shammah, 
 and Mizzah: these were the sons of 
 Bashemath Esau’s wife. 
 
 14 { And these were the sons of 
 Aholibamah, the daughter of Anah 
 the daughter of Zibeon, Esau’s wife: 
 and she bare to Esau Jeush, and 
 Jaalam, and Korah. 
 
 15 { These were dukes of the sons 
 of Esau: the sons of Eliphaz the first- 
 born son of Esau; duke Teman, duke 
 Omar, duke Zepho, duke Kenaz, 
 
 16 Duke Korah, duke Gatam, and 
 duke Amalek: these are the dukes 
 that came of Eliphaz in the land of 
 Edom; these were the sons of Adah. 
 
 17 4 And these are the sons of 
 Reuel Esau’s son; duke Nahath, duke 
 Zerah, duke Shammah, duke Mizzah: 
 these are the dukes that came of Reuel 
 in the land of Edom; these are the 
 sons of Bashemath Esau’s wife. 
 
 GEN PSs eee 
 
 [v. 14—24. 
 
 18 @ And these are the sons of 
 Aholibamah Esau’s wife; duke Jeush, 
 duke Jaalam, duke Korah: these were 
 the dukes that came of Aholibamah 
 the daughter of Anah, Esau’s wife. 
 
 19 These are the sons of Esau, who 
 is Edom, and these are their dukes. 
 
 20 {| “These are the sons of Seir @: Chron, 
 
 the Horite, who inhabited the land; * 3* 
 Lotan, and Shobal, and Zibeon, and 
 Anah, 
 
 21 And Dishon, and Ezer, and Di- 
 shan: these are the dukes of the Hor- 
 ites, the children of Seir in the land 
 of Edom. 
 
 22, And the children of Lotan were 
 Hori and Hemam; and Lotan’s sister 
 was Timna. 
 
 23 And the children of Shobal 
 were these; Alvan, and Manahath, 
 and Ebal, Shepho, and Onam. 
 
 24 And these are the children of 
 
 ites, and formed a distinct and powerful tribe. 
 The Arabs have a legend concerning an abo- 
 riginal tribe of Amalek, with whom it has 
 been thought that the Edomitish Amalekites 
 were fused. Niéldeke has a monograph on 
 the Amalekites, in which he shews that the 
 Arabian legends concerning them are drawn 
 directly or indirectly from the Old Testa- 
 ment, and are utterly valueless when they de- 
 part from that only historical source. ‘There 
 is no authority in the Old ‘Testament for the 
 existence of this aboriginal tribe, except the 
 mention in ch. xiv. 7 of ‘‘the country of the 
 Amalekites.” ‘This name, however, is pro- 
 bably given by anticipation, not because the 
 country was so called in Abraham’s time, but 
 because it had become known by that title 
 before the time of Moses and the Exodus. 
 The Amalekites, having their chief seat to the 
 south of the mountains of Judah, as far as 
 Kadesh (Num. xiii. 29, xiv. 43, 45), spread 
 over the whole of the northern part of Arabia 
 Petreza, from Havilah to Shur on the border 
 of Egypt (1 S. xv. 3, 7, xxvii. 8); whilst one 
 branch penetrated into the heart of Canaan 
 
 (Judg. xii. 15). 
 
 13. Nabath] ‘A descent.” Cp. with 
 the valley of Akaba of like significance 
 (Knob.). 
 
 Shammah]| Cp. the Sameni, a tribe of No- 
 mad Arabs mentioned by Steph. Byzant. 
 (Knob.) 
 
 14. <Abolibamah| See note A on vv. 2, 
 3 below. 
 
 Korah| Perhaps perpetuated in the mo- 
 dern tribe of Kurayeh (Knobel). 
 
 15. dukes] i.e. duces, leaders of tribes, 
 phylarchs. ‘The Hebrew a//uph is connected 
 with eleph, which signifies either ‘¢ a thousand” 
 or ‘a family.” Hence Bochart and others 
 understand here chiliarchs, leaders of thou- 
 sands; whilst others, with more probability, 
 understand phylarchs, heads of tribes or fami- 
 lies, (see Ges. ‘Thes,’ pp. 105, 106). Ro- 
 senmiiller thinks that the word is used meto- 
 nymically for a family, and would render 
 ‘* These are the families (or tribes) of the sons 
 of Esau.” ‘This interpretation would apply 
 well throughout the catalogue, but does not 
 so well correspond with the etymology and 
 formation of the word. 
 
 16. Duke Korah| ‘These words are 
 omitted in one MS. in the Sam. Pent. and 
 Version. They are considered as having 
 crept in through a clerical error from v. 18, 
 by Kennicott, Tuch, Knobel, Delitzsch, 
 Keil, &c. 
 
 20. sons of Seir the Horite| ‘The in- 
 habitants of the country previously to the 
 Edomitish invasion. ‘The Horites (i.e. Trog- 
 lodytes or dwellers in caves), mentioned ch, 
 xiv. 6 as an independent people, were partly 
 exterminated and partly subdued by Esau and 
 his descendants (Deut. ii. 12, 22). 
 
 Lotan| is compared with Leyathan, the 
 name of a fierce tribe in the neighbourhood of 
 Petra (Knobel). 
 
 22. Hemam]| Cp. Homaima, a place to 
 the south of Petra (Knobel). 
 
 23. Alvan] Cp. the Alawin, a tribe of 
 Arabs of evil notoriety to the north of Akaba 
 (Knobel). 
 
v. 25—33-] 
 
 Zibeon; both Ajah, and Anah: this 
 was that Anah that found the mules 
 in the wilderness, as he fed the asses 
 of Zibeon his father. 
 
 25 And the children of Anah were 
 these; Dishon, and Aholibamah the 
 daughter of Anah. 
 
 26 And these are the children of 
 Dishon; Hemdan, and Eshban, and 
 Ithran, and Cheran. 
 
 27 ‘The children of Ezer are 
 these; Bilhan, and Zaavan, and A- 
 kan. 
 
 28 The children of Dishan are 
 these; Uz, and Aran. 
 
 Manahath| Ptolemy, v. 17, 3, mentions 
 Manychiates west of Petra (Knobel). 
 
 Shepho| Cp. the hill Shafeh north of Akaba 
 (Robinson, ‘ B. R.’ I. 256; Knobel). 
 
 24. Anah that found the mules] Anah that 
 foundthe hotsprings. (See note on vv. 2, 3 
 below.) ‘The Greek Versions do not translate 
 the word yemim (the LXX. has répv "Japeiv). 
 The Samaritan text has ‘‘the Emim,” a gigan- 
 tic people, with which agrees the Targum of 
 Onkelos, ‘‘the giants.” ‘This is followed by 
 Bochart, Patrick, and others. ‘The ‘Targum 
 of Pseudo-Jonathan renders ‘‘ mules,” being 
 followed herein by Saad., Kimchi, and many 
 Rabbins, by Luther, and the Authorised Ver- 
 sion. ‘The Vulgate renders ‘‘ warm waters,” 
 aquas calidas, and the Syriac has ‘‘ waters,” 
 a rendering adopted by Gesen. (see ‘ Thes.’ 
 p- 586), Rosenm., Schumann, and most mo- 
 dern interpreters. There were many warm 
 springs in this region, the most famous being 
 Callirrhoe, in the Wady Zerka Maein, which 
 some suppose to have been the very springs 
 discovered by Anah. 
 
 31. And these are the kings that reigned 
 in the land of Edom, before there reigned any 
 king over the children of Israel| ‘These words 
 have led many to suppose that this and the 
 following verses were a late interpolation, as, 
 it is thought, they must have been written 
 after kings had reigned in Israel. Spinoza 
 argued from them that it was clearer than 
 midday that the whole Pentateuch was written 
 centuries after the time of Moses; a most il- 
 logical conclusion, for the utmost that could 
 be inferred would be that (as Kennicott sup- 
 posed) these verses were taken from 1 Chron. 
 i. 43—54, and having been inserted in the 
 margin of a very ancient MS. of Genesis, had 
 crept into the text. 
 
 ‘There is however nothing inconsistent with 
 the Mosaic origin of the whole passage. In 
 the last chapter (ch. xxxv. 11) there had been 
 
 GENESIS. XXAVI. 
 
 29 These are the dukes that came 
 of the Horites; duke Lotan, duke 
 Shobal, duke Zibeon, duke Anah, 
 
 30 Duke Dishon, duke Ezer, duke 
 Dishan: these are the dukes that came 
 of Hori, among their dukes in the 
 land of Seir. 
 
 31 {1 And these are the kings that 
 reigned in the land of Edom, before 
 there reigned any king over the chil- 
 dren of Israel. 
 
 32 And Bela the son of Beor 
 reigned in Edom: and the name of 
 his city was Dinhabah. 
 
 33 And Bela died, and Jobab the 
 
 an emphatic promise from God Almighty 
 (El-Shaddai) to Jacob that ‘‘kings should 
 come out of his loins.” ‘The Israelites, no 
 doubt, cherished a constant hope of such a 
 kingdom and such a kingly race. Moses him- 
 self (Deut. xxvii. 36) prophesied concerning 
 the king that the Israelites should set over 
 them; and hence it was not unnatural that, 
 when recording the eight kings, who had 
 reigned in the family of Esau up to his own 
 time, he should have noted that as yet no 
 king had risen from the family of his brother 
 Jacob, to whom a kingly progeny had been 
 promised. ‘The words in the original are 
 ‘before the reigning of a king to the sons of 
 Israel;” and might be rendered, ‘‘ whilst as 
 yet the children of Israel have no king;” there 
 being nothing in the words expressive of a 
 past tense, or indicating that before the writ- 
 ing of the sentence a king had reigned in 
 Israel. 
 
 The other difficulty in the passage is chro- 
 nological, it being thought that so many dukes 
 and kings could not have succeeded one an- 
 other in the period which elapsed from Esau 
 to Moses. But there is no reason to suppose 
 that the dukes, mentioned from v. 15 to 19, 
 reigned in succession, then the kings from v. 
 31 to 39, and then again the dukes mentioned 
 from v. 40 to 43. Onthe contrary, a compari- 
 son of Num. xx. 14 with Exod. xv. 15 shews, 
 that a single king was reigning in Edom con- 
 temporaneously with several dukes or phyl- 
 archs. The dukes (as their title indicates) 
 were not sovereigns of the whole of Idumza, 
 but princes or rulers of tribes or provinces: 
 moreover the kings do not appear to have 
 succeeded by inheritance, the son never suc- 
 ceeding to his father. lence they were pro- 
 bably elected by the dukes. 
 
 33. Jobab] ‘The LXX. and some of the 
 fathers consider this to have been, the same 
 person as Job; and the mention of Eliphaz in 
 v. II in connection with Teman, and of Eli- 
 
 IgI 
 
rg2 
 
 son of Zerah of Bozrah reigned. in 
 his stead. 
 
 34 And Jobab died, and Husham 
 of the land of ‘I’emani reigned in his 
 stead. 
 
 5 And Husham died, and Hadad 
 the son of Bedad, who smote Midian 
 in the field of Moab, reigned in his 
 stead: and the name of his city was 
 Avith. 
 
 36 And Hadad died, and Samlah 
 of Masrekah reigned in his stead. 
 
 7 And Samlah died, and Saul of 
 Rehoboth dy the river reigned in his 
 stead. 
 
 38 And Saul died, and Baal-hanan 
 the son of Achbor reigned in his 
 stead. 
 
 39 And Baal-hanan the son of 
 
 phaz the Temanite in the book of Job favours 
 this belief. 
 
 Bozrah| A famous city of Idumeza (see 
 Isa. xxxiv. 6, Ixili. 1, &c.), remains of which 
 are still traced in E/ Buseireh, a ruined village 
 in Jebal. (Burckhardt, ‘Syr.’ 407; Robinson, 
 If. 167.) 
 
 37. Rehoboth by the river] or Rehoboth 
 Hannahar, so distinguished from Rehoboth Ir, 
 ch. x. 11. The river here is probably the 
 Euphrates. 
 
 89. Hadar] Called Hadad in x Chr. i. 
 50, and here also in the Samaritan text. He 
 probably was living when Moses wrote, as no 
 mention is made of his death, an argument for 
 the Mosaic origin of this chapter; for Hadad 
 could hardly have been living after the time of 
 the kings of Israel, to which period those who 
 from v. 31 consider it to be an interpolation 
 would assign this genealogy, or perhaps the 
 whole chapter. 
 
 40. And these are the names of the 
 dukes, &c.| From comparing the words in 
 
 GENESIS. 
 
 x DEN Ta [v. 34—43- 
 
 Achbor died, and Hadar reigned in 
 his stead: and the name of his city 
 was Pau; and his wife’s name was 
 Mehetabel, the daughter of Matred, 
 the daughter of Mezahab. 
 
 40 And these are the names of the 
 dukes that came of Esau, according 
 to their families, after their places, by 
 their names; duke ‘Timnah, duke 
 Alvah, duke Jetheth, 
 
 41 Duke Aholibamah, duke Elah, 
 duke Pinon, 
 
 42 Duke Kenaz, duke Teman, duke 
 Mibzar, 
 
 43 Duke Magdiel, duke Iram: 
 these de the dukes of Edom, accord- 
 ing to their habitations in the land of 
 their possession: he is Esau the fa- 
 ther of ‘the Edomites. : 
 
 this verse ‘‘ after their places, by their names” 
 with those in v. 43, ‘‘ according to their habi- 
 tations in the land of their possession,” it is 
 inferred with great probability, that this se- 
 cond catalogue of dukes is, not a catalogue of 
 dukes who reigned subsequently to the kings 
 of the preceding verses, nor a different version 
 of the catalogue given in vv. 15 to 19, but ra- 
 ther a territorial catalogue, recounting, not 
 the names, but the cities in which the various 
 dukes or phylarchs before named had _ their 
 seat of government. If so, we must render 
 ‘the duke of Timnah, the duke of Alvah, the 
 duke of Jetheth, &c.” Two of the names in 
 this list correspond with two in the former 
 list, viz. Timnah and Kenaz, because, as it is 
 supposed, the dukes Timnah and Kenaz called 
 their cities after their own names. Aholiba- 
 mah may have been a city called after the 
 Horite princess (v. 25). (So Schumann, Kno- 
 bel, Del., Keil, Kalisch, @cijaeee 
 
 43. the father of the Edomites] See on 
 Vv. 9. 
 
 NOTE A on CHAP. XXXVI. vv. 2, 3. 
 
 Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite, and 
 Abolibamah the daughter of Anah, the daugh- 
 ter of Zibeon the Hivite; and Bashemath, Ish- 
 mael’s daughter, sister of Nebajoth| ‘The dif- 
 ficulty of reconciling this with the names of 
 the three wives of Esau, as given in ch. xxvi. 
 34, XXVill. 3, will be seen by comparing the 
 two accounts as follows: 
 
 Ch. xxvi. 34, XXVlil. 9. 
 
 1. Judith, daughter of Beeri the Hittite. 
 
 2. Bashemath, daughter of Elon the Hittite. 
 
 3. Mahalath, daughter of Ishmael, sister 
 
 to Nebaioth. 
 
 Ch. xxxvi. 2. 
 
 1. Aholibamah, daughter of Anah daugh- 
 
 ter of Zibeon the Hivite. 
 
 2. Adah, daughter of Elon the Hittite. 
 
 3. Bashemath, daughter of Ishmael, sister 
 
 to Nebaioth. 
 
 From this table it appears that every one of 
 the three wives is designated by a different 
 name in the earlier history from that in the 
 later genealogy. Yet there can be little doubt 
 that 2 Bashemath the daughter of Elon= Adah 
 the daughter of Elon, nor that 3 Mahalath= 
 Bashemath, both being described as daughter 
 
 eb. 
 
 Edom. 
 
aly 2] 
 
 of Ishmael, and sister of Nebaioth. We may 
 therefore conclude also that 1 Judith = Aholi- 
 bamah. ‘This excludes the explanation sug- 
 gested by several commentators, that the wives 
 of Esau, named in ch. xxvi. 34 had died with- 
 out offspring, and that Esau had married 
 others. It seems far more probable that the 
 one set of names were those which they bore in 
 their father’s house, the other set having been 
 given to them by Esau, or by the Edomites, 
 after they had become mothers of tribes. 
 
 1. The identity of Judith and Aholibamah 
 may appear thus. Judith is called the daugh- 
 ter of Beeri the Hittite, whilst Aholibamah is 
 called ‘‘the daughter of Anah, the daughter 
 of Zibeon the Hivite.”’ Anah was probably 
 not the mother, but the father of Aholibamah, 
 the second ‘‘ daughter” being referrible back 
 to Aholibamah, and not attributable to Anah 
 (unless the reading of the Samaritan, LXX., 
 and Syriac, ‘‘the son of Zibeon,” be the right 
 reading); for in v. 24 we find that Anah was 
 the son of Zibeon, and the grandson of Seir 
 the Horite. The reason why the same person 
 has been called Anah and Beeri has been de- 
 rived by Hengstenberg and others from the 
 fact that Anah is said, in v. 24, to have dis- 
 covered the hot springs, from which very pro- 
 bably he acquired the name of Beeri, .e. font- 
 anus, **the well-finder.” A greater difficulty 
 is apparent in his being called a ‘ Hittite” 
 (xxvi. 34), a ‘‘Hivite” (xxxvi. 2), and a 
 ‘‘ Horite” (xxxvi. 20). It is observed that 
 these three words ‘‘ Hittite,” ‘‘ Hivite,” and 
 ‘‘ Horite,” differ in Hebrew by one letter 
 only, and that they were easily interchanged 
 in transcription. It is, however, clear (from 
 xxvii. 46) that Rebekah calls Judith a daugh- 
 ter of Heth. And from xxxvi. 20, 24, 25, 
 that Aholibamah, the daughter of Anah, was 
 a Horite. The difficulty seems therefore rather 
 
 GENESIS. 
 
 MeL 
 
 to admit of solution by saying that Hittite 
 (like Amorite) was a generic name for a large 
 portion of the Canaanitish people, compre- 
 hending both Hivites and Horites. It is not 
 improbable that Hivite in v. 2 may be an 
 error of transcription for Horite (*1N for ‘N), 
 in which case we have only to conclude that 
 the Horites of Mount Seir were reckoned by 
 Isaac and Rebecca as among the Hittite in- 
 habitants of Canaan. If, however, the read- 
 ing Hivite be correct, it is not impossible that 
 the Hivites, a southern people, may originally 
 have come from Mount Seir, and have been 
 dwellers in its rocky fastnesses, which is the 
 meaning of the word Horite (troglodyte, 
 dweller in caves). If this be correct, then 
 we must conclude that Judith the daughter 
 of Anah, called Beeri, from his finding the 
 hot springs, and the granddaughter of Zibeon 
 the Horite, one of the tribes reckoned in the 
 great Hittite family, when she married Esau, 
 assumed the name of Aholibamah (‘‘ the. tent 
 of the height’’). 
 
 %. Bashemath is described exactly as Adah 
 is, i.e. as the daughter of Elon the Hittite. 
 There is no difficulty here except in the 
 change of name into Adah, ‘‘ornament,” a 
 change not improbable for Esau to have made. 
 
 3. In the same manner Mahalath is the 
 daughter of Ishmael the sister of Nebaioth, 
 and Bashemath is the daughter of Ishmael the 
 sister of Nebaioth. There would be no diffi- 
 culty in this, except that Bashemath, the se- 
 cond name of the daughter of Ishmael, is the 
 same with the first name of the daughter of 
 Elon the Hittite. If this seems to some irre- 
 concileable with probability, it may be ascribed 
 to an error of transcription, likely enough to 
 occur in the writing out of genealogies, and 
 the Samaritan text reads Mahalath in the ge- 
 nealogy as well as in the history. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVII. 
 
 ND Jacob dwelt in the land 
 
 193 
 
 twherein his father was a stranger, Heb. 
 in the land of Canaan. of his fa 
 
 ther’s so- 
 
 2, These are the generations of Janes 
 
 2 Yoseph is hated of his brethren. § His two 
 dreams. 13 Facob sendeth him to visit his 
 brethren. 18 His brethren conspire his death. 
 21 Reuben saveth him. 26 They sell him to 
 
 the Ishmeelites. 31 His father, deceived by 
 the bloody coat, mourneth for him. 36 He is 
 sold to Potiphar in Egypt. 
 
 CHAP. XXXVII. 1. And Jacob dwelt in 
 the land, &c.] Ch. xxxv. concluded the his- 
 tory of Isaac. Ch. xxxvi. disposed of the 
 history of Esau and his descendants down to 
 the very time of the Exodus. (See on ch. 
 Xxxvi. 39.) This first verse of ch. xxxvii. 
 now lands us in the time and place, from 
 whence the succeeding history is to begin. 
 Jacob dwelt in the land of his father’s 
 sojournings, in the land of Canaan. 
 Esau had left Canaan to Jacob, who after 
 their father’s death became the sojourner in the 
 land, which his posterity were to possess. 
 
 Vou. 1. 
 
 cob. Joseph, bezmg seventeen years 
 old, was feeding the flock with his 
 brethren; and the lad was with the 
 
 2. These are the generations of Jacob.] 
 The Toledoth, or genealogical history of Isaac 
 began (ch. xxv. 19) after the death of his 
 father Abraham, a few verses having been 
 allotted (vv. 12—x8) to dispose of the his- 
 tory of his brother Ishmael. In the same 
 manner, the Toledoth of Jacob are given in this 
 chapter after the death of his father Isaac, 
 ch. xxxvi. having intervened to account for 
 Esau and his family. Many of the preceding 
 chapters had been occupied with the history 
 of Jacob and his sons, but Jacob’s Toledoth 
 begin at this point, because now he has become 
 
 N 
 
194 
 
 f Or, 
 pieces. 
 
 sons of Bilhah, and with the sons of Zil- 
 pah, his father’s wives: and Joseph 
 brought unto his father their evil report. 
 
 Now Israel loved Joseph more 
 than all his children, because he was 
 the son of his old age: and he made 
 him a coat of many ‘colours. 
 
 4 And when his brethren saw that 
 their father loved him more than all 
 his brethren, they hated him, and 
 could not speak peaceably unto him. 
 
 5 4 And Joseph dreamed a dream, 
 and he told zt his brethren: and they 
 hated him yet the more. 
 
 6 And he said unto them, Hear, I 
 pray you, this dream which I have 
 dreamed : 
 
 7 For, behold, we were binding 
 
 the sole head and father of the chosen seed. 
 The Toledoth, or family history, of Jacob con- 
 tinues now till his death ch. 1. 
 
 2. Joseph, being seventeen years old.| ‘This 
 history goes back a few years; for Isaac must 
 have been living when Joseph was seven- 
 teen. (See note at the end of ch. xxxi.) 
 But the historian had fully wound up the 
 history of Isaac, before commencing the To/e- 
 doth of Jacob; and he now gives unity to the 
 history of the descent into Egypt by beginning 
 with the adolescence of Joseph, his father’s 
 fondness for him, and his brothers’ jealousy 
 of him. 
 
 3. the son of his old age] It is not im- 
 possible that the greater part of this narrative 
 may have been chronologically before the birth 
 of Benjamin and the death of Rachel, related 
 in ch. xxxy. 18. 
 
 coat of many colours} (1). The LXX. 
 Vulg. and most modern versions render a 
 garment made of different pieces, of patch- 
 work, and so of many colours. In the well- 
 known scene from the tomb of Chnoumhotep 
 at Beni Hassan, a tomb of the XIIth dynasty, 
 the Semitic visitors who are offering presents 
 to the Governor are dressed in robes of rich 
 colouring, apparently formed of separate small 
 pieces or patches sewn together. ‘There is an 
 excellent engraving and explanation in Brugsch, 
 ‘Histoire d’Egypte,’ p. 63. 
 
 (2). The versions of Aquila, Symm., Syr. 
 render a tunic with sleeves or fringes extending 
 to both hands and feet, tunica manicata et 
 talaris (see Hieron. ‘ Qu.’ ad h.1.), which is 
 the interpretation adopted by most modern 
 Hebraists (see Ges. ‘‘Thes.’ p. 1117). We find 
 ‘Thamar, the daughter of David, wearing this 
 same dress (2 S. xili. 18): and Josephus 
 (‘Ant.’ vil. 8. 1) speaks of long garments reach- 
 
 GENESIS, 
 
 AXAV IL 
 
 sheaves in the field, and, lo, my sheaf 
 arose, and also stood upright; and, be- 
 hold, your sheaves stood round about, 
 and made obeisance to my sheaf. 
 
 8 And his brethren said to him, 
 Shalt thou indeed reign over us? or 
 shalt thou indeed have dominion over 
 us? And they hated him yet the 
 more for his dreams, and for his 
 words. 
 
 g { And he dreamed yet another 
 dream, and told it his brethren, and 
 said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream 
 more; and, behold, the sun and the 
 moon and the eleven stars made obei- 
 sance to me. 
 
 10 And he told zt to his father, 
 and to his brethren: and his father 
 
 [v. 3—10. 
 
 ing to the hands and ankles as worn by Jewish 
 maidens. But the engraving at Beni Hassan 
 just mentioned makes the former interpreta- 
 tion (1) the more probable. 
 
 It has been thought by some that Jacob, 
 in his anger at the sins of his elder sons, 
 especially of Reuben his firstborn, and in his 
 partiality for Joseph, the firstborn of Rachel, 
 designed to give him the right of primogeniture, 
 that this robe was the token of birthright, and 
 perhaps even designating the priestly office of 
 the head of thefamily. (See Heidegger, Tom. II. 
 p. 581. Braunius ‘de Vestitu sacerdotali,’ pp. 
 473 8qq., Kurtz, Vol.1. p.378, Clark’s transla- 
 tion, Blunt, ‘ Undesigned Coincidences,’ p. 15.) 
 
 7. we were binding sheaves in the field] 
 It appears from this, that Jacob was not a 
 mere nomad, but, like his father Isaac (ch. 
 XXvi. 12), had adopted agricultural as well as 
 pastoral employments. 
 
 10. his father rebuked him] Joseph 
 may have told the dream in the simplicity 
 of his heart, or perhaps he may have been 
 elated by his father’s partiality and by ‘‘the 
 abundance of the revelations” (2 Cor. xii. 7). 
 
 thy mother] It is possible that Rachel 
 may have been living now, for neither the date 
 of the dream nor of Rachel’s death are clearly 
 given. ‘The dream may have been some time 
 before the selling of Joseph, and is only re- 
 lated here as one of the reasons which caused 
 his brethren to hate him. If, however, Ra- 
 chel was dead, we must then understand Jacob 
 to mean by ‘“‘thy mother” either Leah, who 
 would be his step-mother, or perhaps more 
 likely Bilhah, who was Rachel’s handmaid, 
 and at once nurse and step-mother to Jo- 
 seph; and it is not impossible that in either 
 Leah or Bilhah the dream may have been ful- 
 filled; for we do not know whether they were. 
 
GENESIS. 
 
 rebuked him, and said unto him, 
 What zs this dream that thou hast 
 dreamed? Shall I and thy mother 
 and thy brethren indeed come to bow 
 ie” down ourselves to thee to the earth? 
 
 11 And his brethren envied him; 
 but his father observed the saying. 
 
 12 4 And his brethren went to feed 
 their father’s flock in Shechem. 
 
 y. 11—24.] XX XVII. 
 went after his brethren, and found 
 them in Dothan. 
 
 18 And when they saw him afar 
 off, even before he came near unto 
 them, they conspired against him to 
 slay him. 
 
 1g And they said one to another, 
 Behold, this ‘dreamer cometh. 
 
 20 Come now therefore, and let 
 
 195 
 
 t Heb, 
 master of 
 dreams. 
 
 13 And Israel said unto Joseph, 
 Do not thy brethren feed the flock 
 in Shechem? come, and I will send 
 thee unto them. And he said to 
 him, Here am J. 
 
 14 And he said to him, Go, I pray 
 
 us slay him, and cast him into some 
 pit, and we will say, Some evil beast 
 hath devoured him: and we shall see 
 what will become of his dreams. 
 
 21 And @ Reuben heard zt, and he « chap. 42. 
 
 delivered him out of their hands; and ** 
 
 Heb. thee, ‘see whether it be well with thy said, Let us not kill him. 
 saceor brethren, and well with the flocks; 22 And Reuben said unto them, 
 Den éxe, 2nd bring me word again. So he Shed no blood, 4ut cast him into this 
 
 came to Shechem| 
 
 sent him out of the vale of Hebron, 
 and he came to Shechem. 
 
 15 " And a certain man found 
 him, and, behold, be was wandering 
 in the field: and the man asked him, 
 saying, What seekest thou? 
 
 16 And he said, I seek my bre- 
 thren: tell me, I pray thee, where 
 they feed their flocks. 
 
 17 And the man said, They are 
 departed hence; for I heard them say, 
 Let us go to Dothan. And Joseph 
 
 pit that zs in the wilderness, and lay 
 no hand upon him; that he might rid 
 him out of their hands, to deliver him 
 to his father again. 
 
 23 4 And it came to pass, when 
 Joseph was come unto his brethren, 
 that they stript Joseph out of his 
 coat, his coat of many "colours that ! 
 was on him; 
 
 24 And they took him, and cast 
 him into a pit: and the pit was empty, 
 there was no water in it. 
 
 alive or not when Jacob went down into 
 Egypt. 
 
 14. out of the vale of Hebron, and he 
 It appears from this that 
 Jacob was now dwelling in the neighbourhood 
 of Hebron where his father Isaac was still 
 living (see on v. 3). After the slaughter of 
 the Shechemites (see ch. xxxiv.) Jacob jour- 
 neyed southward; but from the fact that his 
 sons were sent to feed sheep in Shechem, it is 
 not impossible that he may have left some of 
 his cattle still in their old pastures, and his 
 anxiety here about his sons, who were thus 
 feeding in Shechem, may have arisen in part 
 from the enmity excited against them in that 
 neighbourhood by their violence. Inch. xxxv. 
 we trace Jacob’s southward journeyings from 
 Shechem first to Bethel, v. 6; then to Bethle- 
 hem, vv. 16, 19; then to the tower of Edar, 
 v. 21; and finally to Hebron, v. 27, where 
 Isaac died, v. 29. But from this verse, ch. 
 XXXvVil. 14, we infer that Jacob must have 
 arrived at Hebron several years before his 
 father’s death. 
 
 17. Dothan] or Dothain, the two wells or 
 cisterns. ‘They may have gone there because 
 
 of the water in these wells. 
 (Euseb. ‘Onomasticon’) to have been twelve 
 Roman miles north of Sebaste (z.e. Shechem 
 or Samaria) towards the plain of Jezreel. It 
 still retains its ancient name (Robinson, ‘B. R.’ 
 UIs 133). 
 
 20. some pit] A cistern, or well, dug by 
 the shepherds of the country, to catch and 
 preserve the rain-water. Some of these cis- 
 terns were very deep, and a lad thrown into 
 one of them would have been unable to escape. 
 
 24. the pit was empty, there was no 
 avater init] Apparently referred to by Zech. 
 ix. II, ina prophecy of the Messiah. Joseph 
 has been recognised by most Christian inter- 
 preters as a type of Christ; in his father’s love 
 for him, in his being sent to his brethren, re- 
 jected by them, sold to the Gentiles, delivered 
 to death, in the sanctity of his life, in his hu- 
 miliation, in his exaltation to be a Prince and 
 a Saviour, in that his father and mother and 
 brethren all came and bowed down to him. 
 We may notice here, that the counsels of his 
 brethren to prevent the fulfilment of his dreams, 
 like the counsels of Herod and the Jews to 
 prevent the fulfilment of the prophecies con- 
 
 N 2 
 
 Dothan is said 
 
 r, 
 C. 
 
 pieces. 
 
196 GENESIS. 
 
 25 And they sat down to eat 
 bread: and they lifted up their eyes 
 and looked, and, behold, a company 
 of Ishmeelites came from Gilead with 
 their camels bearing spicery and balm 
 and myrrh, going to carry 7t down to 
 Egypt. 
 
 26 And Judah said unto his bre- 
 thren, What profit 7s it if we slay 
 our brother, and conceal his blood ? 
 
 27 Come, and let us sell him to 
 the Ishmeelites, and let not our hand 
 be upon him; for he zs our brother 
 
 tHeb. a@ndour flesh. And his brethren ‘were 
 hearkened,. 
 content. 
 
 28 ‘Then there passed by Midian- 
 ites merchantmen ; and they drew and 
 ’ Psal. 105. lifted up Joseph out of the pit, 2and 
 Wisd. ro. sold Joseph to the Ishmeelites for 
 Acts7.9. twenty pieces of silver: and they 
 brought Joseph into Egypt. 
 29 4 And Reuben returned unto 
 the pit; and, behold, Joseph was not 
 in the pit; and he rent his clothes. 
 
 cerning Jesus, only served to bring about 
 God’s counsels, which were wrought out by 
 the very means taken to defeat them. If 
 Joseph had not been sold to the Midianites, 
 he would never have been exalted to be gover- 
 nor in Egypt. If Christ had not been perse- 
 cuted and at last crucified, He would not 
 have worked out redemption for us, have risen 
 from the dead, and ascended up into His 
 glory. 
 
 25. they sat down to eat bread} In 
 this heartless meal Reuben can have taken 
 no part. It appears from verse 29, that 
 he must have left his brethren, perhaps with 
 the very purpose of seeking means to rescue 
 Joseph. The simplicity and truthfulness of 
 the narrative are all the more apparent by 
 the indifference of the writer to the ques- 
 tion how and why it was that Reuben was 
 absent at this point of the history. A forger 
 would have been likely to tell all about it, and 
 make it all plain. Yet strangely enough, this 
 very artlessness has been made an argument 
 against the historical truth of the narrative, as 
 being clumsily arranged, and inconsistent in 
 these details. 
 
 25. a company of Ishmeelites| ‘A tra- 
 velling company” or ‘‘caravan.” Ishmaelites 
 ‘afterwards called Midianites in v. 28, and 
 Medanim in v. 36. See note on ch. xxv. 2. 
 Medan and Midian were sons of Abraham 
 by Keturah; Ishmael his son by Hagar. ‘The 
 Ishmaelites and Midianites were near neigh- 
 
 ONAL L [v, 25-35. 
 
 30 And he returned unto his bre- 
 thren, and said, The child zs not; 
 and I, whither shall I go? 
 
 31 And they took Joseph’s coat, 
 and killed a kid of the goats, and 
 dipped the coat in the blood ; 
 
 32 And they sent the coat of many 
 colours, and they brought 7¢ to their 
 father; and said, This have we found: 
 know now whether it se thy son’s 
 coat or no. 
 
 33 And he knew it, and said, /¢ is 
 
 my son’s coat; an “evil beast hath de- «chap. 44 
 
 voured him; Joseph is without doubt ** 
 rent in pieces. 
 
 34 And Jacob rent his clothes, and 
 put sackcloth upon his loins, and 
 mourned for his son many days. . 
 
 35 And all his sons and all his 
 daughters rose up to comfort him; 
 but he refused to be comforted; and 
 he said, For I will go down into the 
 grave unto my son mourning. “Thus 
 his father wept for him. 
 
 bours, and very probably joined together in 
 caravans and commercial enterprizes. Very 
 probably too the Ishmaelites, being the more 
 powerful tribe, may have by this time become 
 a general name for several smaller and asso- 
 ciated tribes. 
 
 spicery| probably ‘‘storax,” the gum of the 
 styrax-tree. So Aqu. followed by Bochart, 
 ‘Hieroz.’ II. p. 532, Gesen. ‘'Thes.’ p.883, &c. 
 The LXX. and Vulg. give only ‘‘perfumes.” 
 
 balm] Probably the gum of the opobalsam 
 or balsam-tree, which grew abundantly in 
 Gilead, and was especially used for healing 
 wounds. ‘This is the interpretation commonly 
 given by the Jews, and adopted by Bochart: 
 (‘ Hieroz.’ I. 628); Celsius (‘ Hierob.’ I. 180) ; 
 Ges, ‘Thes.’ 1185, &c.). . Lee (Lexeanaon) 
 contends for ‘‘mastich” as the right rendering. 
 
 myrrbh| According to almost all modern 
 interpreters Ladanum, an odoriferous gum 
 found on the leaves of the cistus creticus or 
 cistus ladanifera. (See Celsius, ‘Hierob.’ 1. 
 280—288, Gesen. ‘’Thes.’ p.748, Smith, ‘ Dict. 
 of Bible,’ s.v. Myrrh.) 
 
 27. were content] hearkened. 
 
 35. his daughters| See on ch. xxx. 21. 
 
 into the grave| To sheol. He thought 
 his son devoured by wild beasts, therefore the 
 word Sheol translated ‘‘ grave” must here mean 
 the place of the departed. ‘The word appears 
 to signify a hollow subterraneous place (comp. 
 hell, hole, &c.). (See Ges. ‘Thes.’ p. 1348.) 
 
v. 36—6. | 
 
 ‘tHeb. 36 And the Midianites sold him 
 eunuch. F i : 
 
 But the into Egypt unto Potiphar, an ‘officer 
 word doth 
 
 Genify not Of Pharaoh’s, aud ‘' captain of the 
 only ew at guard. 
 
 _ ie 
 
 also CHaWi- 
 
 berlains, CHAPTER XXXVIII. 
 courtiers, 
 
 and ofi- 1 Yudah begetteth Er, Onan, and Shelah. 6 
 fTeb Lr marrieth Tamar. 8 The trespass of Onan. 
 chief ofthe 1% Tamar stayeth for Shelah. 13 She de- 
 slaughter. ceiveth Fudah. 27 She beareth twins, Pharez 
 men, OY, and Zarah. 
 
 execution- = ‘ 
 
 i ND it came to pass at that time, 
 
 that Judah went down from his 
 brethren, and turned in to a certain 
 Adullamite, whose name was Hirah. 
 
 chief mar- 
 shal. 
 
 36. Potiphar| Generally supposed to be 
 the same as Potiphera, i.e. ‘‘devoted to Ra,” 
 the Sun-God. (See Ges. ‘Thes.,’ p. 1094.) 
 It is far more probably ‘‘devoted to Par or 
 Phar,” i.e. to the Royal House or Palace. 
 (See ‘Excursus on Egyptian Words’ at the 
 end of this volume.) 
 
 an officer of Pharaoh’s| Heb. *¢an eunuch;” 
 but used also of chamberlains and other offi- 
 cers about the court. ‘The immediate prede- 
 cessor in Manetho of Sesostris, who was of 
 the same dynasty with Joseph’s Pharaoh, was 
 slain by his eunuchs. 
 
 captain of the guard| Chief of the execu- 
 tioners, or ‘‘commander of the body guard,” 
 who executed the sentences of the king. (Cp. 
 Boh, xxv. 8; Jer. xxxix. 9, lii.12.) ‘Herod. 
 (11. 168) tells us that ‘‘a thousand Calasirians 
 and the same number of Hermotybians form- 
 ed in alternate years the body-guard of the 
 king” of Egypt. 
 
 CuHap. XXXVIII. 1. it came to pass at 
 that time| ‘This chapter may appear to be 
 an useless digression inserted at an incon- 
 venient time; but in reality it supplies a very 
 important link, and this was probably the 
 best place for its introduction. In the Jo/e- 
 doth, or family history, of Jacob, the two 
 chief persons were Joseph and Judah; Joseph 
 from his high character, his personal import- 
 ance, his influence in the future destinies of 
 the race, and his typical foreshadowing of the 
 Messiah; Judah, from his obtaining the vir- 
 tual right of primogeniture, and from his 
 being the ancestor of David and of the Son of 
 David. Hence, at a natural pause in the 
 history of Joseph, viz. when he had been 
 now sold into Egypt and settled in Potiphar’s 
 house, the historian recurs to the events in 
 the family of Judah, which he carries down 
 to the birth of Pharez, the next link in the 
 ancestry of ‘the Saviour. Thus he clears 
 away all that was necessary to be told of 
 the history of the twelve patriarchs, with the 
 
 Cr N Estoy AX AA ARO XV ITT 
 
 197 
 
 2 And Judah saw there a daughter 
 of a certain Canaanite, whose name 
 was *Shuah; and he took her, and «: Chron. 
 went in unto her. Bes, 
 
 And she conceived, and bare a 
 son; and he called his name Er. 
 
 4 °And she conceived again, and ? Numb. 
 bare a son; and she called his name — Pa 
 Onan. 
 
 5 And she yet again conceived, 
 and bare a son; and called his name 
 Shelah: and he was at Chezib, when 
 she bare him. 
 
 6 And Judah took a wife for Er 
 
 exception of that which was involved in the 
 history of Joseph. ‘There is also a remark- 
 able contrast brought vividly out by this 
 juxtaposition of the impure line of Judah and 
 his children with the chastity and moral in- 
 tegrity of Joseph as seen in the succeeding 
 chapter. 
 
 at that time| It is by no means certain 
 that this note of time is to be immediately 
 connected with the events in the last chapter. 
 The strict chronological sequence in these 
 Toledoth is not always followed. Episodes, 
 like the genealogies of Ishmael and Esau above 
 referred to, are introduced here and there, in 
 order to avoid interrupting the general order 
 of another narrative, and so this episode of the 
 history of Judah is brought in to prevent an 
 interruption in the history of Joseph. If the 
 chronology in note at the end of ch. xxxi. be 
 adopted, Judah would have been at least 26 
 at the time of Jacob’s flight from Padan- 
 aram, and from that time to the going down 
 to Egypt there would be an interval of 33 
 years. 
 
 qwent down from his brethren] i.e. went 
 southward (Abenezra, Rosenm. &c.). 
 
 Aduliamite| Adullam, a place afterwards 
 famous in the history of David, 1 S. xxii. 1 
 (see also Josh. xii. 15; 2 S. xxiii. 13; 1 Chr. 
 xi. 15; 2 Chr. xi. 7; Micah i. 15), is men- 
 tioned by Jerome as existing in his day, then 
 a small village to the east of Eleutheropolis. 
 It must have lain in the southern part of the 
 plain of Judah, but its site has not been dis- 
 covered by modern travellers. 
 
 2. a certain Canaanite, whose name was 
 Shuah| Shuah was the name of the father 
 of Judah’s wife, not of the wife herself, 
 as appears from the Hebrew and from v. 
 12. ‘This marriage of Judah with one of the 
 daughters of the land was the fruitful source 
 of sin and misery in his family. 
 
 5. at Chezib] Probably the same as Achzib 
 mentioned with Adullam, Mic. i. 14, 15. 
 
GENESIS. 
 
 his firstborn, whose name was Ta- 
 mar, | 
 
 7 And ¢Er, Judah’s firstborn, was 
 wicked in the sight of the Lorp; and 
 the Lorp slew him. 
 
 8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go 
 in unto thy brother’s wife, and marry 
 her, and raise up seed to thy brother. 
 
 And Onan knew that the seed 
 should not be his; and it came to 
 pass, when he went in unto his bro- 
 ther’s wife, that he spilled zt on the 
 ground, lest that he should give seed 
 to his brother. 
 
 10 And the thing which he did 
 (Heb. ‘displeased the Lorp: wherefore he 
 in the eyes Slew him also. 
 om 11 Then said Judah to Tamar his 
 daughter in law, Remain a widow at 
 thy father’s house, till Shelah my son 
 be grown: for he said, Lest perad- 
 venture he die also, as his brethren 
 did. And Tamar went and dwelt in 
 her father’s house. 
 t Heb. 12 @ And ‘in process of time the 
 RS daughter of Shuah Judah’s wife died; 
 “eued. and Judah was comforted, and went 
 
 198 
 
 ¢ Numb. 
 26. 19. 
 
 X XXVIII. 
 
 up unto his sheepshearers to Tim- 
 nath, he and his friend Hirah the 
 Adullamite. 
 
 13 And it was told Tamar, saying, 
 Behold thy father in law goeth up to 
 Timnath to shear his sheep. 
 
 14 And she put her widow’s gar- 
 ments off from her, and covered her 
 with a vail, and wrapped herself, and 
 sat in ‘an open place, which Zs by the t Heb. 
 way to Timnath; for she saw that phen | 
 Shelah was grown, and she was not £7a/im. 
 given unto him to wife. 
 
 15 When Judah saw her, he thought 
 her to be an harlot; because she had 
 covered her face. 
 
 16 And he turned unto her by the 
 way, and said, Go to, I pray thee, 
 let me come in unto’ thee; (for he 
 knew not that she was his daughter 
 in law.) And she said, What wilt 
 thou give me, that thou mayest come 
 in unto me? | 
 
 17 And he said, I will send thee 
 ‘a kid from the flock. And she said, t Heb. 
 
 Wilt thou give me a pledge, till thou 427.2%. 
 send it? 
 
 a A 
 
 eee, Ee 
 
 68. Tamar] i.e. ‘a palm-tree.” 
 
 8. raise up seed to thy brother] As this 
 was before the law of Moses, it would appear 
 probable that this /ex /eviratus, law of mar- 
 riage with a brother’s widow, rested on some 
 traditional custom, very probably among the 
 Chaldees. The law of Moses did not abo- 
 lish it, but gave rules concerning it (Deut. 
 XXV. 5), as was the case as regards many 
 other ancient practices. ‘This law of levirate 
 marriage prevailed among Indian, Persian, 
 African, and some Italian races (Diod. Sic. 
 x11 78). 
 
 ll. Then said Judah to Tamar] Judah 
 perhaps superstitiously seems to have thought 
 Tamar in some way the cause of his son’s 
 death (cp. Tobit iii. 7); or he may have 
 thought Shelah too young to marry. 
 
 12, Iimnath| Probably not the border town 
 of Dan and Judah, between Ekron and Beth 
 Shemesh (Josh. xv. 10), but Timnah in the 
 mountains of Judah (Josh. xv. 57). 
 
 his friend] The LXX., and Vulg. have 
 ‘‘his shepherd,” but Onkelos, Syr., Arab. and 
 most modern interpreters, render as the Au- 
 thorised Version, which is probably right. 
 
 14, in an open place] In the gate of 
 Enaim. So the LXX,, Jerome (in ‘Loc. 
 
 Heb.’), Gesen., Winer and most modern in- 
 terpreters, Enaim is probably the same as 
 Enam, Josh, xv. 34. Enam is a place in the 
 plain which lay on the road from Judah’s 
 dwelling-place to Timnath (Knobel). Other 
 possible renderings are ‘‘at the opening of the 
 eyes,” z.e. in a public place, such as ‘the 
 crossing of two roads,” (so Vulg., Syr., and 
 many Jewish interpreters); and ‘at the break- 
 ing forth of two fountains” (so Abenezra, 
 Rosenm. and others): but the first is pretty 
 certainly the true. 
 
 15. an harlot; because she had covered her 
 Jace] Probably Judah thought her to be 
 a woman having a vow. Inv. 21, he calls 
 her by a title translated “harlot,” meaning 
 literally ‘‘consecrated,” i.e. to the impure 
 worship of Astarte, as was the custom of 
 Babylon in the worship of Mylitta (Herod, 1. 
 199). This abominable worship was very 
 early introduced into Canaan and Egypt. So 
 Kedeshah, ‘a consecrated woman,” appears to 
 have come into use as a kind of euphemism. 
 The veil probably led Judah to think her thus 
 under a vow: for there is no reason to sup- 
 pose that mere profligates so covered their 
 faces (see Ges. ‘Thes.’ p.1197), The worship 
 of the Dea Syra at Byblos is recorded at a 
 very early age. In the time of Rameses II, i+ 
 was already very ancient. 
 
ll Or, 2 
 Enazim. 
 
 i Heb. 
 become a 
 contempt. 
 
 men] GENESIS, XXXVIIL XXXIX., 199 
 
 18 And he said, What pledge shall 
 I give-thee? And she said, ‘Thy sig- 
 net, and thy bracelets, and thy staff 
 that zs in thine hand. And he gave 
 it her, and came in unto her, and she 
 conceived by him. | 
 
 1g And she arose, and went away, 
 and laid by her vail from her, and 
 put on the garments of her widow- 
 hood. 
 
 20 And Judah sent the kid by the 
 hand of his friend the Adullamite, to 
 receive his pledge from the woman’s 
 hand: but he found her not. 
 
 21 Then he asked the men of that 
 place, saying, Where zs the harlot, 
 that was 'openly by the way side? 
 And they said, There was no harlot 
 in this place. — 
 
 22 And he returned to Judah, and 
 said, I cannot find her; and also the 
 men of the place said, that there was 
 no harlot in this place. 
 
 23 And Judah said, Let her take 
 it tovher, lest we ‘be shamed: be- 
 hold, I sent this kid, and thou hast 
 not found her. 
 
 24 4 And it came to pass about 
 three months after, that it was told 
 Judah, saying, Tamar thy daughter 
 in law hath played the harlot; and 
 also, behold, she zs with child by 
 whoredom. And Judah said, Bring 
 
 her forth, and let her be burnt. 
 
 25 When she was brought forth, 
 she sent to her father in law, saying, 
 
 By the man, whose these are, am I 
 with child: and she said, Discern, I 
 pray thee, whose are these, the signet, 
 and bracelets, and staff. 
 
 26 And Judah acknowledged them, 
 
 and said, She hath been more righteous 
 
 than I; because that I gave her not 
 to Shelah my son. And he knew her 
 again no more. 
 27 4 And it came to pass in the 
 time of her travail, that, behold, twins 
 were in her womb. 
 28 And it came to pass, when she 
 travailed, that the one put out his hand: 
 and the midwife took and bound upon 
 his hand a scarlet thread, saying, ‘This 
 came out first. 
 29 And it came to pass, as he drew 
 back his hand, that, behold, his brother 
 came out: and she said, 'How hast tor, 
 thou broken forth? this breach de up- ore 
 on thee: therefore his name was called #2# made 
 A? Pharez, pen 
 30 And afterward came out his I That is, 
 brother, that had the scarlet thread 9°72 
 
 4 5 x Chron. 
 
 upon his hand: and his name was ab 
 Latt. I. 3 
 called Zarah. : 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIX. 
 
 1 Joseph advanced in Potiphar’s house. 4 He 
 resisteth his mistress’s temptation. 13 He is 
 falsely accused. 20 He ts cast in prison. 21 
 God is with him there. 
 
 ND Joseph was brought down to 
 Egypt; and Potiphar, an officer 
 of Pharaoh, captain of the guard, an 
 
 Egyptian, bought him of the hands 
 
 18. Thy signet] <A seal or signet-ring. 
 The ancients wore it sometimes, not as a ring 
 on the finger, but*hanging round the neck by 
 a cord or chain (Ges. ‘’Thes.’ p. 534). 
 
 thy bracelets] Thy cord: the cord or string 
 by which the seal was suspended (so Ges., 
 Rosenm., Schum., Lee). 
 
 staff| It was probably of.considerable 
 value, as among the Babylonians, and on 
 Egyptian monuments. 
 
 21. openly] At Enaim. See on v.14. 
 
 26. She has been more righteous than I] 
 Judah acknowledges that he had done wrong 
 to Tamar in not giving her his son Shelah, 
 according to the /ex /eviratus, that the bro- 
 ther should raise up seed to his brother, 
 It appears further from Ruth ch. iil. iv. that, 
 according to, the patriarchal custom, the 
 
 nearest of kin was to take the widow to wife, 
 hence when Shelah does not take her, she 
 considers Judah the right person with whom 
 to form such an alliance. 
 
 29. How hast thou broken forth? this breach 
 be upon thee] Or, ‘‘why hast thou made 
 a rent for thyself?” or ‘‘hast rent a rent for 
 thyself?” 
 
 Phare] t.e. “breach” or ‘breaking forth.” 
 30. Zarah] i.e. ‘‘rising.” 
 
 CuHap. XXXIX. 1. And Joseph was 
 brought down to Egypt, &c.] A recapitula~ 
 tion of the narrative in ch. xxxvii. 36, which 
 had been interrupted by the history of Judah’s 
 family in ch, xxxviii. 
 
 Ishmeelites| See on ch, xxxvii. 25. 
 
200 
 
 of the Ishmeelites, which had brought 
 him down thither. 
 
 2 And the Lorp was with Joseph, 
 and he was a prosperous man; and he 
 was in the house of his master the 
 Egyptian. 
 
 3 And his master saw that the 
 Lorp was with him, and that the 
 Lorp made all that he did to prosper 
 in his hand. | 
 
 4. And Joseph found grace in his 
 sight, and he served him: and he 
 made him overseer over his house, 
 and all that he had he put into his 
 hand. 
 
 5 And it came to pass from the 
 time that he had made him overseer 
 in his house, and over all that he had, 
 that the Lorn blessed the Egyptian’s 
 house for Joseph’s sake ; and the bless- 
 ing of the Lorp was upon all that he 
 had in the house, and in the field. 
 
 6 And he left all that he had in 
 Joseph’s hand; and he Knew not 
 ought he had, save the bread which 
 he did eat. And Joseph was a goodly 
 person, and well favoured. 
 
 2. the Lorpv was with Joseph| ‘The 
 variety in the use of the Divine names in the 
 history of Joseph is very observable. ‘The 
 name JEHOVAH occurs only where the 
 narrator is speaking in his own person; until 
 we come to ch. xlix. where Jacob uses it in 
 the midst of his blessing on Dan, ch. xlix. 18. 
 In all other speeches in the history we have 
 Elohim, sometimes Ha-Elohim with the arti- 
 cle, and sometimes El, or Ha-El. The rea- 
 son of this is generally apparent. ‘The whole 
 history, though given by an inspired writer 
 to whom the name JEHOVAH was familiar, 
 concerns the history of Joseph and his kindred 
 in contact with a heathen people. It is there- 
 fore on all accounts natural that the general 
 name Elohim, and not the specially revealed 
 name JEHOVAH, should be used in dialo- 
 gue. Even the narrative, as in ch. xlvi., is 
 most naturally carried on in a so-called Elo- 
 histic form, the name Elohim being of com- 
 mon use to both Hebrews and Egyptians. 
 The adoption of the name E/ (or Ha-E1) in 
 xlvi. 3, is probably with marked reference to 
 the blessing on Abraham pronounced in the 
 name of E/-Shaddai in ch. xvii. 1. 
 
 4. overseer] The Egyptian sculptures 
 represent the property of rich men as super- 
 intended by scribes or stewards, who are 
 exhibited as carefully registering all the opera- 
 
 GENESIS, XXXIX. 
 
 [v. 2—13. 
 
 7 { And it came to pass after these 
 things, that his master’s wife cast her 
 eyes upon Joseph; and she said, Lie 
 with me. 
 
 8 But he refused, and said unto 
 his master’s wife, Behold, my master 
 wotteth not what zs with me in the 
 house, and he hath committed all that 
 he hath to my hand; 
 
 g There is none greater in this house 
 than I; neither hath he kept back any 
 thing from me but thee, because thou 
 art his wife: how then can I do this 
 great wickedness, and sin against God? 
 
 10 And it came to pass, as she 
 spake to Joseph day by day, that he 
 hearkened not unto her, to lie by her, 
 or to be with her. 
 
 11 And it came to pass about this 
 time, that “foseph went into the house 
 to do his business; and there was none 
 of the men of the house there within. 
 
 12 And she caught him by his gar- 
 ment, saying, Lie with me: and he 
 left his garment in her hand, and fled, 
 and got him out. 
 
 13 And it came to pass, when she 
 
 tions of the household, the garden, the field, 
 &e, 
 
 6. Joseph was a goodly person, and well 
 favoured] Lit. ‘‘was fair of form and fair of 
 aspect,” or ‘‘appearance.” 
 
 7. his master’s wife| ‘The licentious- 
 ness of the Egyptian women has always been 
 complained of (see Herod. 11. rrz; Diod. 1. 
 59). ‘The same appears from the monuments, 
 which prove also that women did not live so 
 retired a life in Egypt as in other ancient and 
 especially Eastern countries (Wilkinson, Vol. 
 II. p. 389, Hengstenb. ‘ Egypt.’ p. 26). ‘There 
 is a very remarkable resemblance between this 
 passage in the history of Joseph and a very 
 ancient Egyptian Romance in the Papyrus 
 d’Orbiney in the British Museum, called 
 ‘The ‘Two Brothers,” in which the wife of 
 the elder brother acts in the same manner 
 and uses almost the same words towards 
 the younger brother as Potiphar’s wife uses 
 towards Joseph (see Ebers, ‘* Agypten,’ 
 
 Pp: 311). 
 
 9. sin against God| ‘The direct sin 
 would have been against his master; but 
 Joseph clearly recognized that the true guilt 
 of all sin consists in its breach of the law, and 
 disobedience to the will of God. 
 
mar4—3Z.] CEN os eh, XL, 201 
 
 saw that he had left his garment in seph, and 'shewed him mercy, and Heb. 
 | her hand, and was fled forth, gave him favour in the sight of the #707 
 
 kindness 
 unto hint, 
 
 Heb. 
 reat. 
 
 14 That she called unto the men 
 of her house, and spake unto them, 
 saying, See, he hath brought in an 
 Hebrew unto us to mock us; he came 
 in unto me to lie with me, and I cried 
 with a ‘loud voice: 
 
 15 And it came to pass, when he 
 heard that I lifted up my voice and 
 cried, that he left his garment with 
 me, and fled, and got him out. 
 
 16 And she laid up his garment 
 by her, until his lord came home. 
 
 17 And she spake unto him accord- 
 ing to these words, saying, he He- 
 
 keeper of the prison. 
 
 22 And the keeper of the prison 
 committed to Joseph’s hand all the 
 prisoners that were in the prison; and 
 whatsoever they did there, he was the 
 doer of it. 
 
 23 The keeper of the prison looked 
 not to anything ¢hat was under his 
 hand; because the Lorp was with 
 him, and that which he did, the Lorp 
 made zt to prosper. 
 
 CHAPTER XL. 
 1 Zhe butler and baker of Pharaoh in prison. 
 
 . 4 Joseph hath charge of them. § He inter- 
 br ew servant, which thou hast brought preteth their dreams. 20 They come to pass 
 unto us, came 1n unto me to mock me: according to his interpretation. 23 The in- 
 
 18 And it came to pass, as I lifted 
 up my voice and cried, that he left his 
 garment with me, and fled out. 
 
 tg And it came to pass, when his 
 master heard the words of his wife, 
 which she spake unto him, saying, 
 After this manner did thy servant to 
 me; that his wrath was kindled. 
 
 20. And Joseph’s master took him, 
 and put him into the prison, a place 
 where the king’s prisoners were bound : 
 and he was there in the prison. 
 
 21 4 But the Lorp was with Jo- 
 
 20. prison] ‘The word here used oc- 
 curs only here and in ch. xl. It probably 
 means a turret or rounded (perhaps arched) 
 building or apartment, arched or rounded for 
 strength, used as a prison or dungeon. It 
 appears from ch. xl. 3, to have been a part of 
 the house of the captain of the guard or chief 
 of the executioners, in which the state pri- 
 soners were kept, and to have had a special 
 jailer or keeper of the prison, an officer of the 
 chief of the executioners, placed over it. In 
 ch. xl. 15, Joseph speaks of it as ‘‘a dungeon” 
 or pit, which would quite correspond with 
 the character of an arched or vaulted room. 
 In Ps. cv. 17, 18, the imprisonment of Joseph 
 is represented as having been very severe, 
 ‘‘whose feet they afflicted with the fetters, 
 the iron entered into his soul.” It is most 
 probable that at first Joseph’s treatment may 
 have been of this character, the crime with 
 which he was charged having been such that 
 a slave would most likely have been instantly 
 put to death for it. By degrees, however, he 
 gained, under God’s Providence, the confi- 
 dence of the jailer (v. 22), when the rigour 
 
 gratitude of the butler. 
 
 ND it came to pass after these 
 
 things, that the butler of the 
 
 king of Egypt and Ais baker had of- 
 fended their lord the king of Egypt. 
 
 2 And Pharaoh was wroth against 
 two of his officers, against the chief 
 of the butlers, and against the chief 
 of the bakers. 
 
 3 And he put them in ward in the 
 house of the captain of the guard, 
 into the prison, the place where Jo- 
 seph was bound. 
 
 _ 
 
 of his confinement was mitigated, and at 
 length the chief of the executioners himself 
 (either Potiphar, or, as some think, his suc- 
 cessor) intrusts him with the care of im- 
 portant state prisoners. ‘The fact that Joseph 
 was not put to death, and by degrees treated 
 kindly in prison, has given rise to the conjec- 
 ture, that Potiphar did not wholly believe his 
 wife’s story, though he to a certain extent acted 
 on it (Cleric in loc., Keil, &c.). 
 
 Cuap. XL. 2. the chief of the butlers] 
 The chiefof the cupbearers. ‘The office 
 of cupbearer to the sovereign was one of im- 
 portance and high honour in the East. See 
 Herod. III. 34. 
 
 chief of the bakers| or ‘* confectioners.” 
 The Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan adds that 
 ‘they had taken counsel to throw the poison 
 of death into his food and into his drink, to 
 kill their master, the king of Mizraim.” This 
 is probably only a conjecture from the fact 
 that the two offending persons were 1m- 
 mediately concerned with the food and the 
 drink of the king. 
 
+t Heb. 
 
 are your 
 
 4 And the captain of the guard 
 charged Joseph with them, and he 
 served them: and they continued a 
 season in ward. 
 
 5 4 And they dreamed a dream 
 both of them, each man his dream _in 
 one night, each man according to the 
 interpretation of his dream, the butler 
 and the baker of the king of Egypt, 
 which were bound in the prison. 
 
 6 And Joseph came in unto them 
 in the morning, and looked upon them, 
 and, behold, they were sad. 
 
 7 And he asked Pharaoh’s officers 
 that were with him in the ward of his 
 lord’s house, saying, Wherefore * look 
 
 GEN pda es. 
 
 [v. 416. 
 
 branches: and it was as though it 
 budded, and her blossoms shot forth; 
 and the clusters thereof brought forth 
 ripe grapes: — 
 
 11 And Pharaoh’s cup was in my 
 hand: and I took the grapes, and 
 pressed them into Pharaoh’s cup, and 
 I gave the cup into Pharaoh’s hand. 
 
 12 And Joseph said unto him, This 
 is the interpretation of it: The three 
 branches are three days: 
 
 13 Yet within three days shall 
 Pharaoh 'lift up thine head, and re-10r, 
 store thee unto thy place: and thou 
 shalt deliver Pharaoh’s cup into his 
 hand, after the former manner when 
 thou wast his butler. 
 
 « YECKONs 
 
 ye so sadly to day? 
 
 8 And they said unto him, We 
 have dreamed a dream, and there is 
 no interpreter of it. And Joseph said 
 
 Jaces evil? : ‘ 
 14 But ‘think on me when it shall + Heb. 
 
 be well with thee, and shew kindness, 727724” 
 I pray thee, unto me, and make men- “« 
 
 unto them, Do not interpretations e- 
 long to God? tell me them, I pray you. 
 g And the chief butler told his 
 dream to Joseph, and said to him, In 
 my dream, behold, a vine was before 
 me ; 
 10 And in the vine were three 
 
 tion of me unto Pharaoh, and bring 
 me out of this house: 
 
 15 For indeed I was stolen away 
 out of the land of the Hebrews: and 
 here also have I done nothing that 
 they should put me into the dungeon. 
 
 16 When the chief baker saw that 
 
 4. they continued a season] Lit. ‘‘days,” 
 by which the Jews very generally understand 
 a year. 
 
 9. a vine| Herodotus denies the ex- 
 istence of vines in ancient Egypt, and says 
 that the Egyptian wine was made of barley 
 (II. 77). Yet Herodotus himself (11. 42, 48, 
 144) and Diodorus (1. 11) identify Osiris 
 with the Greek Bacchus, the discoverer of the 
 vine, and Diodorus (1. 15) expressly ascribes 
 to Osiris the first cultivation of the vine. But, 
 moreover, it now appears from the monu- 
 ments that both the cultivation of grapes and 
 the art of making wine were well known in 
 Egypt from the time of the Pyramids. Wine 
 was universally used by the rich throughout 
 Egypt, and beer supplied its place at the tables 
 of the poor, not because ‘‘they had no vines 
 in the country, but because it was cheaper,” 
 (Sir G. Wilkinson’s note in Rawlinson’s 
 Herod. 11. 77. See also Rosellini, Vol. 1, 
 PP- 365, 373) 377; Wilkinson, Vol. 11. 143; 
 Hengstenberg, ‘Egypt,’ &c. p.16 ; Havernick, 
 ‘Introd. to Pentateuch,’ in h.1.; Ebers, ‘A°gyp- 
 ten,’ p.323.) 
 
 11. I took the grapes, and pressed them| 
 Some have thought that this indicates that the 
 Egyptians did not at this time practise the 
 fermentation of the grape, but merely drank 
 
 the fresh juice, which would accord with the 
 statement of Plutarch (‘Is. et Osir.’ § 6) that 
 the Egyptians before the time of Psammetichus 
 neither drank wine nor made libations thereof, 
 as esteeming it to have sprung from the blood 
 of those who made war with the gods; but 
 the monuments represent the process of fer-= 
 menting wine in very early times. See last 
 note. 
 
 13. shali Pharaoh lift up thine head| Some 
 think this expression merely means ‘will take 
 count of thee,” ‘‘ will remember thee.” Cp. 
 Ex. xxx,12; Num. i. 49; where the marginal 
 reading is ‘‘reckon.” More probably the 
 meaning is, ‘‘ will take thee out of prison” 
 (see Ges. p. 914). 
 
 15. the land of the Hebrews] Though 
 the patriarchs had been strangers and pilgrims, 
 yet Abraham, Isaac and Jacob had effected — 
 something like permanent settlements in the 
 neighbourhood of Mamre, Hebron, Shechem, 
 &c. Probably too the visit of Abraham to 
 Egypt and the intercourse of the Egyptians 
 with the Hittites and other Canaanitish tribes, 
 had made the name of Hebrew known to the 
 Egyptians. Joseph does not say ‘the land of 
 Canaan,” lest he should be confounded with 
 the Canaanites, who were odious to himself as 
 being idolaters, 
 
= LE 
 
 fa baker, 
 
 office frome 
 
 vv. 17—6.] 
 
 the interpretation was good, he said 
 unto Joseph, I also was in my dream, 
 
 or, fut and, behold, J had three "white bas- 
 
 kets on my head: 
 
 17 And in the uppermost basket 
 there was of all manner of ' bakemeats 
 for Pharaoh; and the birds did eat 
 them out of the basket upon my head. 
 
 18 And Joseph answered and said, 
 This is the interpretation thereof: 
 The three baskets are three days: . 
 
 Ig Yet within three days shall 
 Pharaoh "lift up thy head from off 
 thee, and shall hang thee on a tree; 
 and the birds shall eat thy flesh from 
 off thee. | 
 
 20 4 And it came to pass the third 
 day, which was Pharaoh’s birthday, 
 that he made a feast unto all his ser- 
 vants: and he 'lifted up the head of 
 the chief butler and of the chief baker 
 among his servants. 
 
 21 And he restored the chief but- 
 ler unto his butlership again; and he 
 gave the cup into Pharaoh’s hand: 
 
 22 But he hanged the chief baker: 
 as Joseph had interpreted to them. 
 
 23 Yet did not the chief butler re- 
 member Joseph, but forgat him. 
 
 16. three white baskets] Probably ‘‘ baskets 
 of white bread;” so LXX., Aq., Vulg., Syr., 
 Onk. Some prefer ‘‘ baskets full of holes,” 
 ‘‘ perforated,” or ‘‘ wicker baskets.” 
 
 on my head| See Herod. 11. 35, of the men 
 bearing burdens on their heads. 
 
 17. bakemeats for Pharaoh| Lit. ‘‘food 
 for Pharaoh, the work of a baker.” ‘The 
 Egyptians appear to have been very luxurious 
 in the preparation of different kinds of bread 
 and pastry. (See Rosellini, Vol. 11. 264; Wil- 
 kinson, II. 384; Hengstenberg, p. 27.) 
 
 19. shall Pharaoh lift up thy head from off 
 thee] ‘The same words as those used in v. 13, 
 with the addition of ‘‘ from off thee,” making 
 the most vital difference. ‘The mode of pu- 
 nishment was probably decapitation, the most 
 common form of execution in Egypt (Ges. 
 Pp. 915); though some have thought hanging 
 or crucifixion, as Onkelos in loc. Possibly 
 the words may only indicate capital punish- 
 ment, like the capite plecti of the Latins, 
 
 CuaAp. XLI. 1. the river] The ‘yeor,” 
 an Egyptian word signifying ‘‘ great river,” 
 or ‘‘canal,” used in Scripture for the Nile. 
 
 GENESIS, 
 
 Pint D-gaAB 
 CHAPTER XLI. 
 
 1 Pharaoh's two dreams. 25 Foseph inter- 
 preteth them. 33 He giveth Pharaoh counsel. 
 38 Joseph is advanced. 50 He begetteth 
 Manasseh and Ephraim. 54 The famine 
 beginneth, 
 
 ND it came to pass at the end 
 of two full years, that Pharaoh 
 dreamed: and, behold, he stood by 
 the river. ; 
 2 And, behold, there came up out 
 of the river seven well favoured kine 
 and fatfleshed; and they fed in a 
 meadow. 
 
 3 And, behold, seven other kine 
 came up after them out of the river, 
 ill favoured and leanfleshed ; and stood 
 by the other kine upon the brink of 
 the river. 
 
 4 And the ill-favoured and lean- 
 fleshed kine did eat up the seven well 
 favoured and fat kine.. So Pharaoh 
 awoke. 
 
 5 And he slept and dreamed the 
 second time: and, behold, seven ears 
 of corn came up upon one stalk, 
 frank and good. 
 
 6 And, behold, seven thin ears and 
 blasted with the east wind sprung up 
 after them. 
 
 The Nile had a sacred and a_ profane 
 name. ‘The sacred name was Haji, i.e. Apis. 
 The profane name was dur, with the 
 
 epithet aa great. The Coptic forms f&po, 
 T&PUS, correspond exactly to the Hebrew 
 
 yeor. 
 
 2. kine] ‘The Egyptians esteemed the 
 cow above all other animals. It was sacred 
 to Isis (Herod. 11. 41), or rather to Athor, 
 the Venus Genetrix of Egypt, and was looked 
 on as ‘¢a symbol of the Earth and its cultiva- 
 tion and food” (Clem. Alex. ‘Strom.’ v. p. 
 671). Hence it was very natural that in Pha- 
 raoh’s dream the fruitful and unfruitful years 
 should be typified by well-favoured and ill- 
 favoured kine (see Hengstenb. ‘Egypt,’ p. 28). 
 
 ina meadow] Inthe reed grass. The 
 word (Achu) is of Egyptian origin. It is 
 not common, but occurs in a papyrus of early 
 date (akh-akh, green, verdant). Jerome (on 
 Isai. xix. 7) says that ‘when he enquired of 
 the learned what the word meant, he was told 
 by the Egyptians that in their tongue every 
 thing green that grows in marshes is called by 
 this name.” It probably therefore means the 
 sedge, reed, or rank grass by the river’s side, 
 
 20 
 
 t Heb. faz. 
 
204 
 
 @chap. 40. 
 
 I2,5 &c. 
 
 7 And the seven thin ears devour- 
 ed the seven rank and full ears. And 
 Pharaoh awoke, and, behold, zt was a 
 dream. 
 
 8 And it came to pass in the 
 morning that his spirit was trou- 
 bled; and he sent and called for 
 all the magicians of Egypt, and all 
 the wise men thereof: and Pharaoh 
 told them his dream; but there was 
 none that could interpret them unto 
 Pharaoh. 
 
 g { Then spake the chief butler 
 unto Pharaoh, saying, I do remem- 
 ber my faults this day: 
 
 10 Pharaoh was wroth with his 
 servants, and put me in ward in the 
 captain of the guard’s house, doth me 
 and the chief baker: 
 
 11 And we dreamed a dream in 
 one night, I and he; we dreamed 
 each man according to the interpreta- 
 tion of his dream. 
 
 12 And there was there with us a 
 young man, an Hebrew, servant to 
 the captain of the guard; and we told 
 him, and he “interpreted to us our 
 
 6. east wind| Probably put for the 
 S. E. wind (Chamsin), which blows from the 
 desert of Arabia. The East wind of Egypt is 
 not the scorching wind, and indeed seldom 
 blows; but the South-east wind is so parching 
 as to destroy the grass entirely, if it blows 
 very long (see Hengstenberg, p. 10). 
 
 7. behold, it was a dream] The impression 
 on Pharaoh’s mind was so strong and vivid, 
 that he could hardly believe it was not real. 
 The particulars of the dream are all singu- 
 larly appropriate. ‘The scene is by the Nile, 
 on which depends all the plenty of Egypt. 
 The kine and the corn respectively denote the 
 animal and the vegetable products of the 
 country. The cattle feeding in the reed grass 
 shewed that the Nile was fertilizing the land 
 and supporting the life of the beasts. ‘The lean 
 cattle and the scorched-up corn foreshadowed 
 a time when the Nile, for some reason, ceased 
 to irrigate the land. The swallowing up of 
 the fat by the lean signified that the produce 
 of the seven years of plenty would be all con- 
 sumed in the seven years of scarcity. 
 
 8. magicians| Apparently ‘‘sacred scribes;” 
 the name, if Hebrew, being composed of 
 two words signifying respectively a style and 
 sacred. Some have thought the word to be 
 of Egyptian origin, or perhaps a Hebrew 
 
 GENES TS! sa. 
 
 [v. 7—18. 
 
 dreams; to each man according to 
 his dream he did interpret. 
 
 13 And it came to pass, as he in- 
 terpreted to us, so It was; me he 
 restored unto mine office, and him 
 he hanged. 
 
 14 4 %Then Pharaoh sent and 6 Psal. 10; 
 called Joseph, and they ' brought him 7%, 
 hastily out of the dungeon: and he made hi 
 shaved himself, and changed his rai- 
 ment, and came in unto Pharaoh. 
 
 15 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, 
 
 I have dreamed a dream, and there 
 
 zs none that can interpret it: and 
 
 I have heard say of thee, that ' thou tor, 
 canst understand a dream to inter- ynen a 
 pret it. rion) | 
 
 16 And Joseph answered Pharaoh, ixzerpret 
 saying, /¢ is not in me: God shall “ 
 give Pharaoh an answer of peace. 
 
 17 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, 
 
 In my dream, behold, I stood upon 
 the bank of the river: 
 
 18 And, behold, there came up 
 out of the river seven kine, fatfleshed 
 and well favoured; and they fed in a 
 
 meadow: 
 
 compound imitating an Egyptian name (see 
 Ges. ‘ Thes.’ p. 521). There has, however, 
 no Egyptian name been found like it. ‘The 
 magicians appear to have been a regular order 
 of persons among the Egyptians, learned 
 priests, who devoted themselves to magic and 
 astrology (see Hengstenberg, p. 28, and Poole 
 in Smith’s ‘ Dict. of the Bible,’ art. Magic). 
 
 13. me he restored) Joseph prophesied 
 that I should be restored, and,. as he prophe- 
 sied, so it came to pass. 
 
 14. shaved himself| The Hebrews che- 
 rished long beards, but the Egyptians cut both 
 hair and beard close, except in mourning for 
 relations, when they let both grow long (Herod. 
 II. 36). On the monuments when it was 
 ‘¢intended to convey the idea of a man of low 
 condition or a slovenly person, the artists 
 represented him with a beard” (Wilkinson, 
 Vol. III. p. 357; Hengstenberg, p. 30). Jo- 
 seph, therefore, when about to appear be- 
 fore Pharaoh, was careful to adapt himself to 
 the manners of the Egyptians. 
 
 15. that thou canst understand a dream 
 to interpret it} Lit. that thou hearest a 
 dream to interpret it. 
 
 18. in a meadow] In the reed grass. 
 See on Vv. 2. 
 
Vv. I9—40. | CrEON SES: XC UD. 205 
 
 1g And, behold, seven other kine 
 came up after them, poor and very 
 ill favoured and leanfleshed, such as 
 I never saw in all the land of Egypt 
 for badness: 
 
 20 And the lean and the ill fa- 
 voured kine did eat up the first seven 
 fat kine: 
 
 |Heb. ,, _21 And when they had ‘eaten 
 
 inward them up, it could not be known that 
 
 a 7 they had eaten them; but they were 
 still ill favoured, as at the beginning. 
 So I awoke. 
 
 22 And I saw in my dream, and, 
 behold, seven ears came up in one 
 stalk, full and good: 
 
 UOr, 
 
 small, 
 
 23 And, behold, seven ears, ! wi- 
 thered, thin, and blasted with the 
 
 east wind, sprung up after them: 
 
 24 And the thin ears devoured the 
 
 seven good ears: and I told this unto 
 the magicians; but there was none 
 that could declare it to me. 
 
 25 § And Joseph said unto Pha- 
 raoh, The dream of Pharaoh 7s one: 
 God hath shewed Pharaoh: what he zs 
 about to do. 
 
 26 ‘The seven good kine are seven 
 years; and the seven good ears are 
 seven years: the dream zs one. 
 
 27 And the seven thin and ill 
 favoured kine that came up after 
 them are seven years; and the seven 
 empty ears blasted with the east wind 
 shall be seven years of famine. 
 
 28 This is the thing which I have 
 spoken unto Pharaoh: What God is 
 about to do he sheweth unto Pharaoh. 
 
 29 Behold, there come seven years 
 of great plenty throughout all the 
 land of Egypt: 
 
 30 And there shall arise after them 
 seven years of famine; and all the 
 plenty shall be forgotten in the land 
 
 of Egypt; and the famine shall con- 
 sume the land; 
 
 31 And the plenty shall not be 
 known in the land by reason of that 
 famine following; for it shall be very 
 ' prievous. t Heb. 
 
 32. And for that the dream was “*~ 
 doubled unto Pharaoh twice; 7f 7s 
 because the thing zs "established by 10, 
 God, and God will shortly bring it eure 
 to pass. 
 
 33 Now therefore let Pharaoh look 
 out a man discreet and wise, and set 
 him over the land of Egypt. 
 
 34 Let Pharaoh do this, and let 
 him appoint ! officers over the land, tor, 
 and take up the fifth part of the’ 
 land of Egypt in the seven plenteous 
 years. 
 
 35 And let them gather all the 
 food of those good years that come, 
 and lay up corn under the hand of 
 Pharaoh, and let them keep food in 
 the cities. 
 
 36 And that food shall be for store 
 to the land against the seven years of 
 famine, which shall be in the land of 
 Egypt; that the land ‘perish not tHeb. 
 through the famine. pre: oi 
 
 37 @ And the thing was good in 
 the eyes of Pharaoh, and in the eyes 
 of all his servants. 
 
 38 And Pharaoh said unto his ser- 
 vants, Can we find such a one as 
 this 7s, a man in whom the Spirit of 
 God is? 
 
 39 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, 
 Forasmuch as God hath shewed thee 
 all this, there is none so discreet and 
 wise as thou art: € Psal. ros. 
 
 40 © Thou shalt be over my house, Fac. 2. 
 and according unto thy word shall alls. 
 my people be ‘ruled: only in the tHe. 
 
 armed, 
 
 throne will I be greater than thou. Gy, Ziss. 
 
 34. take up the fifth part of the land] 
 i.e. Let him exact a fifth of the produce of 
 the land. The Hebrew is literally ‘let him 
 fifth the land.” (Compare our phrase ‘to 
 tithe the land.”) It has been questioned whe- 
 
 ther the advice was to purchase a fifth of all 
 
 the produce, or rather to impose a tax amount- 
 ing to one fifth of the produce of the land. 
 It has been not improbably conjectured that 
 
 the Egyptian kings usually imposed a tribute 
 of one tenth, and that in this season of un- 
 usual abundance Joseph advises Pharaoh to 
 double the impost, with the benevolent inten- 
 tion of afterwards selling the corn so collected 
 in the time of famine (Cleric.in loc.). On 
 the large storehouses and. granaries of Egypt, 
 see Hengstenb., p. 36, Wilkinson, II. 135. 
 40. according unto thy word shall all my 
 
GEN Eb pilpiexdon: [v. 41—45. 
 
 41 And Pharach said unto Joseph, 
 See, I have set thee over all the land 
 of Egypt. 
 
 t) 
 O 
 CN 
 
 they cried before him, '' Bow the tor, 
 Tender 
 
 knee: and he made him ruler over father. 
 
 all the land of Egypt. t Heb. 
 
 A brech. 
 
 Or, sik. 
 
 42 And Pharaoh took off his ring 
 from his hand, and put it upon Jo- 
 seph’s hand, and arrayed him in ves- 
 tures of 'fine linen, and put a gold 
 chain about his neck; 
 
 43 And he made him to ride in 
 the second chariot which he had; and 
 
 people be ruled| So, or nearly so, (‘‘at thy 
 word shall all my people arm themselves, or 
 dispose themselves,’’) the Versions, ‘Targg. and 
 most commentators. But Kimchi, Gesenius, 
 Knobel, &c., render ‘‘and all my people shall 
 kiss thy mouth,” as a token of reverence and 
 obedience. ‘The objections to the latter in- 
 terpretation are that the kiss of reverence was 
 on the hand or the foot, not on the mouth, 
 which was the kiss of love, and that the con- 
 struction here is with a preposition never used 
 with the verb signifying ‘‘to kiss.” 
 
 42. ring] The signet-ring was the 
 special symbol of office and authority. The 
 seal to this day in the East is the common 
 mode of attestation, and therefore when Pha- 
 raoh gave Joseph his ring he delegated to him 
 his whole authority. 
 
 jine linen| ‘The byssus or fine linen of the 
 Egyptians. The word used for it is Shes, a 
 well-ascertained Egyptian word. It is men- 
 tioned in Ezek. xxvii. as imported into Tyre 
 from Egypt. It was the peculiar dress of the 
 Egyptian priests. 
 
 a gold chain] Probably ‘“‘a simple gold 
 chain in imitation of string, to which a stone 
 scarabzeus set in the same precious metal was 
 appended.” (Wilkinson, III. 376. See also 
 Hengstenberg, p. 31.) 
 
 43. Bow the knee] Abrech. If the 
 word be Hebrew, the rendering of the Au- 
 thorised Version is probably correct. ‘The 
 Targums all give ‘‘father of the king” (cp. ch, 
 
 xlv. 3), deriving from the Hebrew 44, a father, 
 
 and the Chaldee Rech, a king, which, how- 
 ever, is thought to be a corruption ’of the 
 Latin Rex. It is generally thought to be an 
 Egyptian word signifying ‘‘Bow the head,” 
 having some resemblance in form to the 
 Hebrew (De Rossi, ‘Etymol. Egypt.’ p. 
 So Gesen. ‘Thes.,? p. 19, and most of fie 
 Germans). A more probable interpretation 
 is that which is given in the Excursus on 
 Egyptian Words at the end of this volume, 
 viz. ‘‘Rejoice” or **Rejoice thou!” 
 
 45. Zaphnath-paaneah| In the LXX. 
 Psonthomphanek. ‘The Vulg. renders Sa/vator 
 Mundi, ‘‘ Saviour of the World.” Several learn- 
 ed in the language and antiquities of Egypt, 
 Bernard (in Joseph, ‘Ant.’ 11. 6); Jablonski 
 
 44 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, 
 I am Pharaoh, and without thee shall 
 no man lift up his hand or foot in all 
 the land of Egypt. 
 
 45 And Pharaoh called Joseph’s 
 name Zaphnath-paaneah ; and he gave 
 him to wife Asenath the daughter 
 
 (‘Opusce,’ I. 207); Rosellini (‘Monuments,’ ts 
 p. 185), have so interpreted it. ‘They are 
 followed in the main by Gesenius (p. 1181, 
 ‘‘the supporter or preserver of the age”) and 
 a majority of modern commentators. ‘The true 
 meaning appears to be ‘‘the food of life,” or 
 ‘of the living.” (See Excursus on Egyptian 
 Words at the end of this volume.) The 
 Targg., Syr., Arab. and Hebrew interpp. ren- 
 der ‘‘a revealer of secrets,” referring to a 
 Hebrew original, which is on every account 
 improbable. ‘There can be no doubt that 
 Pharaoh would have given his Grand Vizier 
 an Egyptian name, not a Hebrew name, just 
 as the name of Daniel was changed to Belte- 
 shazzar, and as Hananiah, Azariah and Mishael, 
 were called by Nebuchadnezzar, Shadrach, 
 Meshach, and Abednego. 
 
 Asenath]| either ‘‘ devoted to Neith,” the 
 Egyptian Minerva (Ges. ‘’‘Thes.’ p. 130), or 
 perhaps compounded of the two names Isis 
 and Neith, such a form of combination of two 
 names in one being not unknown in Egypt. 
 (See Excursus on Egyptian Words at the end 
 of this volume.) 
 
 Poti-pherab] i.e. “ belonging” or ‘‘ devoted 
 to Ra,” i.e. the Sun, a most appropriate 
 designation for a priest of On or Heliopolis, 
 the great seat of the Sun-worship. (See Ex- 
 cursus on Egyptian Words at the end of this 
 volume. ) 
 
 On] Heliopolis (LXX), called, Jer. xliii. 
 13, Beth-shemesh, the city of the Sun. Cy- 
 ril (ad. Hos. v. 8), says, ‘‘On is with them 
 the Sun.” ‘The city stood on the Eastern 
 bank of the Nile a few miles north of Mem- 
 phis, and was famous for the worship of Ra, 
 the Sun, as also for the learning and wisdom 
 of its priests (Herod. 11. 3). ‘There still re- 
 mains an obelisk of red granite, part of the 
 Temple of the Sun, with a dedication sculp- 
 tured by Osirtasen or Sesortasen I. It is the 
 oldest and one of the finest in Egypt; of the 
 12th dynasty. (Ges. p. 52, Wilkinson, Vol. 
 I. p. 44; also Rawlinson’s Herod. Il. 8, 
 Brugsch, ‘HEY P- 254.) 
 
 The difficulty of su ppOnee that the daugh- 
 ter of a priest of On should have been married 
 to Joseph, a worshipper of JEHOVAH, has been 
 unduly magnified. Neither the Egyptians nor 
 the Hebrews were at this time as exclusive as 
 
“ce. 
 
 ‘chap. 46. 
 
 O. 
 48. 5. 
 
 Or, 
 YINCe. 
 
 That is, 
 Vor- 
 etting. 
 
 | That. is, 
 
 Pruitful. 
 
 6-3.) GENESIS. 
 of Poti-pherah "priest of On. And 
 
 Joseph went out over a// the land of 
 
 Egypt. 
 
 46 @ And Joseph was thirty years 
 old when he stood before Pharaoh 
 king of Egypt. And Joseph went 
 
 out from the presence of Pharaoh, 
 
 and went throughout all the land of 
 
 Egypt. ; 
 
 47 And in the seven plenteous 
 years the earth brought forth by 
 handfuls. 
 
 48 And he gathered up all the 
 food of the seven years, which were 
 
 in the land of Egypt, and laid up 
 
 the food in the cities: the food of 
 
 the field, which was round about 
 every city, laid he up in the same. 
 
 49 And Joseph gathered corn as 
 the sand of the sea, very much, until 
 he left numbering; for zt was with- 
 out number. 
 
 50 “And unto Joseph were born 
 two sons before the years of famine 
 came, which Asenath the daughter 
 of Poti-pherah ! priest of On bare 
 
 unto him. 
 
 51 And Joseph called the name of 
 
 the firstborn !' Manasseh: For God, 
 said he, hath made me forget all my 
 toil, and all my father’s house. 
 
 52 And the name of the second 
 called he ' Ephraim: For God hath 
 caused me to be fruitful in the land 
 of my affliction. 
 
 they became afterwards. ‘The Semitic races 
 were treated with respect in Egypt. Joseph 
 had become thoroughly naturalized (see 
 v. 51 andch. xliii. 32), with an Egyptian name 
 and the rank of Viceroy or Grand Vizier. 
 Abraham had before this taken Hagar, an 
 Egyptian, to wife, which would make such 
 an alliance less strange to Joseph. Whether 
 Asenath adopted Joseph’s faith we are not told, 
 but, in the end at least, she probably did. (See 
 also Excursus on Egyptian Words, on ‘‘ Ase-= 
 nath wife of Joseph,” at the end of this volume. ) 
 
 46. thirty years old] He must therefore 
 have been thirteen years in Egypt, either in Poti- 
 phar’s house or in prison, (See ch, xxxvil. 2.) 
 
 51. Manasseh| i.e. ‘“‘causing to forget.” 
 He was comforted by all his prosperity, so 
 that he no longer mourned over his exile. It 
 does not follow that he was ungratefully for- 
 getful of his home. 
 
 Mie XLT. 207 
 
 53 @ And the seven years of plen- 
 teousness, that was in the land of 
 Egypt, were ended. 
 
 54. ¢ And the seven years of dearth ¢ Psal. 105. 
 began to come, according as Joseph re 
 had said: and the dearth was in all 
 lands; but in all the land of Egypt 
 there was bread. 
 
 55 And when all the land of Egypt 
 was famished, the people cried to Pha- 
 raoh for bread: and Pharaoh said un- 
 to all the Egyptians, Go unto Joseph; 
 what he saith to you, do. 
 
 56 And the famine was over all 
 the face of the earth: And Joseph 
 opened tall the storehouses, and sold t Heb. 
 unto the Egyptians; and the famine points 
 waxed sore in the land of Egypt. 
 
 57 And all countries came into 
 Egypt to Joseph for to buy corn; 
 because that the famine was so sore 
 in all lands. 
 
 CHAPTER XLII. 
 
 t Jacob sendeth his ten sons to buy corn in 
 Egypt. 16 They are imprisoned by Foseph 
 for spies. 18 They are set at liberty, on con- 
 dition to bring Benjamin. 21 They have 
 remorse for Foseph. 24 Simeon ts kept for a 
 pledge. 23 They return with corn, and their 
 money. 29 Their relation to Facob. 36 
 Jacob refuseth to send Benjamin. 
 
 OW when ¢ Jacob saw that « Acts 7. 
 there was corn in Egypt, Ja- ™ 
 cob said unto his sons, Why do ye 
 look one upon another? 
 
 2, And he said, Behold, I have 
 
 52. Ephraim] i.e. ‘‘doubly fruitful,” a 
 dual form. 
 
 54. the dearth] Notwithstanding the 
 fertility generally produced in Egypt by the 
 overflowing of the Nile, yet the swelling of-the 
 Nile a few feet above or below what is neces- 
 sary, has in many instances produced destruc- 
 tive and protracted famines, such that the 
 people have been reduced to the horrible ne- 
 cessity of eating human flesh, and have been 
 almost swept away by death. (See Hengsten- 
 berg, ‘Egypt,’ &c., pp. 37, 38; Hiivernick, 
 Int. to Pentateuch, p. 218; also Smith’s ‘ Dict. 
 of Bible,’ art. Famine.) 
 
 - in all lands] The drought which affected 
 Egypt reached the neighbouring countries also. 
 Ethiopia, Arabia, Palestine, and Syria, would 
 be especially affected by it; and the Egyptians, 
 and Hebrews also, would look on these lands 
 as comprehending the whole known world, 
 
208 
 
 + Heb. 
 hard 
 things 
 
 heard that there is corn in Egypt: 
 get you down thither, and buy for 
 us from thence; that we may live, 
 and not die. 
 
 3 4 And Joseph’s ten brethren 
 went down to buy corn in Egypt. 
 
 4 But Benjamin, Joseph’s brother, 
 Jacob sent not with his brethren; for 
 he said, Lest peradventure mischief 
 befall him. 
 
 5 And the sons of Israel came to 
 buy corn among those that came: for 
 the famine was in the land of Canaan. 
 
 6 And Joseph was the governor 
 over the land, and he it was that 
 sold to all the people of the land: and 
 Joseph’s brethren came, and bowed 
 down themselves before him with 
 their faces to the earth. 
 
 7 And Joseph saw his brethren, 
 and he knew them, but made him- 
 self strange unto them, and spake 
 ‘roughly unto them; and he said un- 
 to them, Whence come ye? And 
 
 with them. they said, From the land of Canaan 
 
 5 chap. 37. 
 
 to buy food. 
 
 8 And Joseph knew his brethren, 
 but they knew not him. 
 
 g And Joseph remembered the 
 dreams which he dreamed of them, 
 and said unto them, Ye are spies; to 
 see the nakedness of the land ye are 
 come. 
 
 10 And they said unto him, Nay, 
 
 Cuap. XLII. 6. be it was that sold 
 to aH the people of the land| We are not 
 to suppose that Joseph personally sold the 
 corn to all buyers, but that he ordered the 
 selling of it, and set the price upon it; and 
 very probably, when a company of foreigners 
 came to purchase in large quantities, they 
 were introduced personally to Joseph, that 
 he might enquire concerning them and give 
 directions as to the sale of corn to them. 
 
 7. spake roughly unto them] Lit. ‘spake 
 hard things with them,” as the margin. ‘This 
 did not arise from a vindictive spirit. It was 
 partly that he might not be recognized by 
 them, and partly that he might prove them 
 and see whether they were penitent for what 
 they had done to him. 
 
 8. they knew not him] He was only 17 
 when they sold him; he was now at least 37, 
 and had adopted all the habits and man- 
 ners of the Egyptians; probably even his com- 
 
 CEN Eee a a 
 
 [v. 393. 
 
 my lord, but to buy food are thy 
 servants come. 
 
 11 We are all one man’s sons; we 
 are true men, thy servants are no spies. 
 
 12 And he said unto them, Nay, 
 but to see the nakedness of the land 
 ye are come. 
 
 13 And they said, ‘hy servants 
 are twelve brethren, the sons of one 
 man in the land of Canaan; and, 
 behold, the youngest zs this day with 
 our father, and one 7s not. 
 
 14 And Joseph said unto them, 
 That is it that I spake unto you, 
 saying, Ye are spies: 
 
 15 Hereby ye shall be proved: By 
 the life of Pharaoh ye shall not go 
 forth hence, except your youngest 
 brother come hither. 
 
 16 Send one of you, and let him 
 fetch your brother, and ye shall be 
 
 : : t Heb. 
 kept in prison, that your words may ane 
 
 be proved, whether there be any truth 
 in you: or else by the life of Pharaoh 
 surely ye are spies. 
 
 17 And he ¢ put them all together 
 into ward three days. 
 
 18 And Joseph said unto them the 
 third day, This do, and live; for 1 
 fear God: 
 
 19 If ye be true men, let one of 
 your brethren be bound in the house 
 of your prison: go ye, carry corn for 
 the famine of your houses: 
 
 plexion had been much darkened by living so 
 long in a southern climate. 
 
 9. the nakedness of the land| i.e. the de- 
 fenceless and assailable points of the country; 
 like the Latin phrases, nuda urbs presidio, nu- 
 data castra, nudi defensoribus muri (Ros.; Cp. 
 Hom. ‘Il.’ XII. 399, retyos éyupvdbn). The 
 Egyptians were always most liable to be as- 
 sailed from the East and North-east. (See 
 Herod. 111. 5.) The various Arab and 
 Canaanitish tribes seem to have constantly 
 made incursions into the more settled and 
 civilized land of Egypt. Particularly the 
 Hittites were at constant feud with the Egyp- 
 tians. Moreover the famous Hycsos invasion 
 and domination may have been very nearly 
 impending at this period. 
 
 15. By the life of Pharaoh| Cp. similar 
 phrases (1 S. i. 263; xvii. 553 2S. xiv. 195 
 2K. ii. 2, 4, 6). Not distinctly an oath, but 
 a strong asseveration. 
 
 t Heb. 
 gathered. 
 
Vi 20—35. | heGENESISYOX ETI, 209 
 
 ‘echap. 43. 20 But “bring your youngest bro- 28 And he said unto his brethren, 
 
 * ~~ ther unto me; so shall your words be My money is restored; and, lo, it 
 verified, and ye shall not die. And is even in my sack: and their heart 
 they did so. "failed them, and they were afraid, t Heb, 
 
 21 4 And they said one to an- saying one to another, What 7s this ry, 
 other, We are verily guilty concern- that God hath done unto us? 
 ing our brother, in that we saw the 29 { And they came unto Jacob 
 anguish of his soul, when he be- their father unto the land of Canaan, 
 sought us, and we would not hear; and told him all that befell unto 
 therefore is this distress come upon us. them; saying, 
 
 22 And Reuben answered them, 30 The man, who is the lord of 
 @ chap. 37. saying, “Spake I not unto you, say- the land, spake ‘roughly to us, and t Heb. 
 ; ing, Do not sin against the child; took us for spies of the country. peal 
 and ye would not hear? therefore, 31 And we said unto him, We are “8° 
 behold, also his blood is required. true men; we are no spies: 
 
 23 And they knew not that Joseph 32 We Le twelve brethren, sons of 
 tHeb. understood them; for ‘he spake unto our father; one zs not, and the young- 
 
 an inter- 
 
 preter was them by an interpreter. est 7s this day with our father in the 
 oo 24 And he turned himself about land of Canaan. 
 
 them, 
 
 from them, and wept; and returned 
 to them again, and communed with 
 them, and took from them Simeon, 
 and bound him before their eyes. 
 
 25 { Then Joseph commanded to 
 fill their sacks with corn, and to 
 restore every man’s money into his 
 sack, and to give them provision for 
 the way: and thus did he unto them. 
 
 26 And they laded their asses with 
 the corn, and departed thence. 
 
 27 And as one of them opened his 
 sack to give his ass provender in the 
 inn, he espied his money ; for, behold, 
 it was in his sack’s mouth. 
 
 20. bring your youngest brother unto me] 
 There seems some needless severity here on 
 the part of Joseph in causing so much anxiety 
 to his father. We may account for it per- 
 haps in the following ways. 1st, Joseph felt 
 that it was necessary to test the repentance of 
 his brethren and to subject them to that kind 
 of discipline which makes repentance sound 
 and lasting. andly, He may have thought 
 that the best mode of persuading his father to 
 go down to him in Egypt was first of all to 
 bring Benjamin thither. 3rdly, He was mani- 
 festly following a Divine impulse and guiding, 
 that so his dreams should be fulfilled, and 
 his race brought into their house of bondage 
 and education, 
 
 24. Simeon] It has been thought that 
 he took Simeon, either because he was the 
 next in age to Reuben, whom he would not 
 bind as having been the brother that sought 
 to save him, or perhaps because Simeon had 
 
 NOL: te 
 
 33 And the man, the lord of the 
 country, said unto us, Hereby shall 
 I know that ye are true men; leave 
 one of your brethren ere with me, 
 and take food for the famine of your 
 households, and be gone: 
 
 34. And bring your youngest bro- 
 ther unto me: then shall I know 
 that ye are no spies, but that ye 
 are true men: so will I deliver you 
 your brother, and ye shall traffick in 
 the land. 
 
 35 “ And it came to pass as they 
 emptied their sacks, that, behold, 
 every man’s bundle of money was in 
 
 been one of the most unfeeling and cruel 
 towards himself, according to the savage tem- 
 per which he shewed in the case of the She- 
 chemites. See ch. xxxiv, xlix. 5. 
 
 25. their sacks| Rather, their vessels; 
 the word is different from that elsewhere used 
 for sacks, and apparently indicates that they 
 had some kind of vessel for corn which they 
 carried within their sacks, 
 
 27. in the inn| ‘The khan, or caravan 
 serail, in the East was, and is still, a place, 
 where men and cattle can find room to rest, 
 but which provides neither food for man nor 
 fodder for cattle. It is doubtful, however, 
 whether anything of this kind existed so early 
 as the time of Joseph, The word means only 
 ‘a resting place for the night,” and very 
 probably was only a station, at which Cara- 
 vans were wont to rest, near to a well, to 
 trees, and to pasture, where the tents were 
 pitched and the cattle were tethered, 
 
 O 
 
210 
 
 his. sack: and when both they and 
 their father saw the bundles of money, 
 they were afraid. 
 
 36 And Jacob their father said 
 unto them, Me have ye bereaved of 
 my children: Joseph is not, and Simeon 
 is not, and ye will take Benjamin 
 away: all these things are against me. 
 
 GENESIS. .XLIL XLII. 
 
 [v. 36—11. 
 
 with us, we will go down and buy 
 thee food: : op tare sae 
 
 5 But if thou wilt. not send him, 
 we will not go down: for the man. 
 said unto us, Ye shall not see my 
 face, except your brother de with you. 
 
 6 And Israel said, Wherefore dealt 
 ye so ill with me, as to tell the man 
 
 whether ye had yet a brother? 
 7 And they said, The man ‘asked t Heb. 
 
 : asking he 
 us straitly of our state, and of our asked us. 
 kindred, saying, /s your father yet 
 alive? have ye another brother? and 
 we told him according to the ' tenor Seat 
 
 of these words: ‘could we certainly { Heb, 
 know that he would say, Bring your peal a 
 
 37 And Reuben spake unto his 
 father, saying, Slay my two sons, if 
 I bring him not to thee: deliver him 
 into my hand, and I will bring him 
 to thee again. 
 
 38 And he said, My son shall not 
 go down with you; for his brother 
 is dead, and he is left alone: if mis- 
 
 t Heb. 
 
 protesting 
 
 chief befall him by the way in the 
 which ye go, then shall ye bring 
 down my gray hairs with sorrow to 
 the grave. 
 
 CHAPTER XLIII. 
 
 1 Facob is hardly persuaded to send Benjamin. 
 - 15 Foseph entertaineth his brethren. 31 He 
 maketh them a feast. 
 
 -AND the famine was sore in the 
 land. 
 
 2 And it came to pass, when they 
 had eaten up the corn which they 
 had brought out of Egypt, their fa- 
 ther said unto them, Go again, buy 
 us a little food. 
 
 3 And Judah spake unto him, say- 
 ing, Ihe man ‘did solemnly protest 
 
 1. protesi- UNtO US, saying, Ye shall not see my 
 
 ed. 
 
 @ chap. 42, 
 
 20. 
 
 face, except your “brother Je with you. 
 4 If thou wilt send our brother 
 
 36. Me have ye bereaved| Jacob sus- 
 pects that they had been in some way the 
 cause of Joseph’s supposed death and of 
 Simeon’s captivity. 
 
 against me] Lit. ‘‘upon me,” 7.e. upon me 
 as a burden too heavy for me to bear. 
 
 CHap. XLII. 11. of the best fruits in 
 the land] Lit. ‘of the song of the land,” 
 i.e. the most praised produce, the fruits cele- 
 brated in song. 
 
 balm] See xxxvil. 25. 
 
 honey| So rendered in all the Versions, 
 though some think that it was composed of the 
 juice of grapes boiled down to a syrup of the 
 consistency of honey, called in Arabic Dis; 
 which even in modern times has been im- 
 
 brother down? ae 
 8 And Judah said unto Israel his 
 father, Send the lad with me, and 
 we will arise and go; that we may 
 live, and not die, both we, and thou, 
 and also our little ones. 
 9 I will be surety for him; of m 
 
 hand shalt thou require him: ?if [? chap. 44. 
 
 bring him not unto thee, and set him 4 
 before thee, then let me bear the 
 blame for ever: 
 
 10 For except we had lingered, 
 surely now we had returned ! this !0r, 
 second time. page! 
 
 1r And their father Israel said un- 
 to them, If zt must be so now, do 
 this; take of the best fruits in the 
 land in your vessels, and carry down 
 the man a present, a little balm, and 
 a little honey, spices, and myrrh, 
 nuts, and almonds: ) 
 
 ported into Egypt annually from the neigh- 
 
 bourhood of Hebron (see Ros. and Ges. 
 Pp- 319). 
 
 spices] Probably Storax. 
 5. 
 
 myrrh| Ladanum. See on xxxvil. 25. 
 
 nuts| Pistachio nuts. So Bochart (‘Hie- 
 roz.’ II. iv. 12); Ceis. (‘ Hierobot.’ ‘Tom. f. p. 
 24); Ges. (p.202). The LXX., followed by 
 Onk., Syr., Arab., renders terebinth, probably 
 because the pistachio nut tree was considered as 
 a species of terebinth. All these fruits may 
 have grown in the land of Canaan, though the 
 corn-harvest may have utterly failed. Thus 
 also may we account for the fact, that the 
 small supply, which could be carried from 
 Egypt by ten asses, sufficed for a time to sup- 
 
 See on XxXxvii. 
 
Vv. 12—20. | 
 
 12 And take double money in your 
 hand; and the money that was brought 
 again in the mouth of your sacks, 
 carry it again in your hand; perad- 
 venture it was an oversight: 
 
 13 Take also your brother, and 
 arise, go again unto the man: 
 
 14 And God Almighty give you 
 mercy before the man, that he ma 
 send away your other brother, and 
 
 10r, 4nd Benjamin. "If I be bereaved of my 
 pia ia children, | am bereaved. 
 
 i 15 4 And the men took that pre- 
 sent, and they took double money in 
 their hand, and Benjamin; and rose 
 up, and went down to Egypt, and 
 stood before Joseph. 
 
 16 And when Joseph saw Benja- 
 min with them, he said to the ruler of 
 his-house, Bring these men home, and 
 slay, and make ready; for these men 
 shall ‘dine with me at noon. 
 
 17 And the man did as Joseph 
 bade; and the man brought the men 
 into Joseph’s house. 
 
 18 And the men were afraid, be- 
 cause they were brought into Joseph’s 
 house; and they said, Because of the 
 money that was returned in our sacks 
 at the first time are we brought in; 
 tHeb. that he may ‘seek occasion against us, 
 a and fall upon us, and take us for bond- 
 bi -men, and our asses. 
 
 1g And they came near to the 
 
 5{n#?: 4% steward of Joseph’s house, and they 
 yas communed with him at the door of 
 down we the house, 
 
 Gein 20 And said, O sir, “<‘we came in- 
 
 t Heb. 
 kill a kill- 
 
 down. 
 
 ply Jacob’s household. ‘There was a griev- 
 ous famine, but still all the fruits of the earth 
 had not failed. Corn was needed; but life 
 can be supported, especially in a warm climate, 
 with but a moderate amount of the more solid 
 kinds of food. 
 
 14. God Almighty] El Shaddai. Jacob 
 here uses that name of the Most High, by 
 which He made Himself known to Abraham, 
 and afterwards renewed His covenant with 
 Jacob himself (ch. xvii. 1, xxxv. 11; where 
 see note). Hereby he calls to mind the pro- 
 mise of protection to himself and his house, as 
 well as the power of Him who had pro- 
 mised. 
 
 If I be bereaved of my children, I am be- 
 
 GENESIS. .XLIIL 
 
 deed down at the first time to buy 
 food: 
 
 21 And it came to pass, when we 
 came to the inn, that we opened our 
 sacks, and, behold, every man’s money 
 was in the mouth of his sack, our 
 money in full weight: and we have 
 brought it again in our hand. 
 
 22 And other money have we 
 brought down in our hands to buy 
 food: we cannot tell who put our 
 money in our sacks. 
 
 23 And he said, Peace be to you, 
 fear not: your God, and the God of 
 your father, hath given you treasure 
 in your sacks: ‘I had your money, ¢ Heb. 
 And he brought Simeon out unto them. %noney 
 
 24 And the man brought the men 67% ” 
 into Joseph’s house, and “gave them @ chap. 18 
 water, and they washed their feet; & 24. 32. 
 and he gave their asses provender. 
 
 25 And they made ready the pre- 
 sent against Joseph came at noon: 
 for they heard that they should eat 
 bread there. 
 
 26 4 And when Joseph came home, 
 they brought him the present which 
 was in their hand into the house, and 
 bowed themselves to him to the earth. 
 
 27 And he asked them of their 
 ' welfare, and said, ' /s your father well, + Heb. 
 the old man of whom ye spake? Js 44%. 
 he yet alive? Pig: 
 
 28 And they answered, Thy ser- your ju- 
 vant our father is in good health, he ““” 
 is yet alive. And they bowed down 
 their heads, and made obeisance. 
 
 29 And he lifted up his eyes, and 
 
 reaved.| Cp. Esth. iv. 16; 2 K.vii.4. The 
 expression seems partly of sorrow and partly 
 of submission and resignation. 
 
 18. that he may seek occasion against us| 
 Lit. ‘‘that he may roll himself upon us,” that 
 is, probably, ‘‘ that he may rush out upon us.” 
 
 20. O Sir] ‘Pray, my lord,” or ‘Hear, 
 my lord,” the word translated O is a particle 
 of earnest entreaty. 
 
 26. and bowed themselves]  Joseph’s 
 first dream is now fulfilled. The eleven 
 sheaves make obeisance to Joseph’s sheaf. It 
 is observable, that Joseph’s dream, like Pha- 
 raoh’s, had reference to sheaves of corn, evi- 
 dently pointing to the supply of food sought 
 by the brethren. 
 
 O2 
 
Z12 
 
 saw his brother Benjamin, his mother’s 
 son, and said, /s this your younger 
 brother, of whom ye spake unto me? 
 And he said, God be gracious unto 
 thee, my son. 
 
 30 And Joseph made haste, for 
 his bowels did yearn upon his brother : 
 and he sought where to weep; and he 
 entered into /is chamber, and wept 
 there. 
 
 31 And he washed his face, and 
 went out, and refrained himself, and 
 said, Set on bread. 
 
 32 And they set on for him by 
 himself, and for them by themselves, 
 and for the Egyptians, which did eat 
 with him, by themselves: because the 
 Egyptians might not eat bread with 
 the Hebrews; for that zs an abomina- 
 tion unto the Egyptians. 
 
 33 And they sat before him, the 
 firstborn according to his birthright, 
 and the youngest according to his 
 youth: and the men marvelled one 
 at another. 
 
 34 And he took and sent messes 
 unto them from before him: but 
 Benjamin’s mess was five times so 
 
 29. my son| Joseph addresses Benjamin 
 his younger brother with this paternal saluta- 
 tion, not only from the difference in their 
 ages, but as being a governor he speaks with 
 the authority and dignity of his position. 
 
 32. the Egyptians might not eat bread 
 with the Hebrews] ‘The Egyptians feared to 
 eat with foreigners, chiefly because they 
 dreaded pollution from such as killed and ate 
 cows, which animals were held in the highest 
 veneration in Egypt. Hence Herodotus says, 
 that an Egyptian would not kiss a Greek, nor 
 use a knife or a spit belonging to a Greek, 
 nor eat any meat that had been cut with a 
 Greek knife (Her. 11. 45). Joseph probably 
 dined alone from his high rank, the distinc- 
 tions of rank and caste being carefully ob- 
 served; but, as he was naturalized in Egypt, 
 and had, no doubt, conformed to their do- 
 mestic customs, he would probably not have 
 needed to separate himself at meals from the 
 native Egyptians, as would his brethren from 
 the land of the Hebrews. 
 
 33. they sat before him] ‘The Egyp- 
 tians sat at their meals, though most of the 
 ancients, and, in later times at least, the He- 
 brews, reclined. 
 
 the men marvelled one at another] They 
 
 (Es INSEESIS. ae Wer gees ve 
 
 much as any of theirs. 
 drank, and 'were merry with him. 
 
 [v. 30—5, 
 
 And they 
 t Heb. 
 
 largely, 
 
 they dran} 
 
 CHAPTER XLIV. 
 
 1 Foseph’s policy to stay his brethren. 14 Fue 
 dah’s humble supplication to Foseph. 
 
 ND he commanded tthe steward + Heb. 
 Fill the him ¢hat 
 
 Was Over 
 
 men’s sacks with food, as much as “5 Aouse. 
 
 of his house, saying, 
 
 they can carry, and put every man’s 
 money in his sack’s mouth. 
 
 2. And put my cup, the silver cup, 
 in the sack’s mouth of the youngest, 
 and his corn money. And he did 
 according to the word that Joseph had 
 spoken. 
 
 3 As soon as the morning was light, 
 the men were sent away, they and 
 their asses. 
 
 4. 4nd when they were gone out 
 of the city, and not yet far off, Joseph 
 said unto his steward, Up, follow after 
 the men; and when thou dost over- 
 take them, say unto them, Wherefore 
 have ye rewarded evil for good? 
 
 5 4s not this zt in which my lord 
 drinketh, and whereby indeed he 'di-! Or 
 
 3 wave 3 maketh 
 vineth? ye have done evil in so doing. trial? 
 
 marvelled that strangers should have seated 
 them exactly according to their ages. 
 
 34. sent messes unto them| ‘The custom 
 is met with elsewhere, as a mark of respect 
 to distinguished guests (see 1 S. ix. 23, 24). 
 
 jive times so much| Herodotus mentions 
 the custom of giving double portions as a 
 mark of honour. The Spartan kings ‘are 
 given the first seat at the banquet, they are 
 served before the other guests, and have a 
 double portion of everything” (VI. 57; cp. 
 also Hom. ‘II.’ vit. 321, VIII. 162). 
 
 were merry| Drank freely. The word is 
 chiefly used of drinking to excess, but not 
 always; see for instance Hagg. i. 6. 
 
 CuHap. XLIV. 2. my cup] or rather 
 bowl. In Jer. xxxv. 5 the word is rendered 
 “pots.” In Ex. xxv. 31, XxKVil yy iteis 
 used of the ‘‘ bowl” or calix of the sculptured 
 flowers. It was evidently a larger vessel, 
 flagon or bowl, from which the wine was 
 poured into the smaller cups. 
 
 5. divineth| Divination by cups was 
 frequent in ancient, times. Jamblichus (‘De 
 Myst.’ II. 14) mentions it, so Varro (ap. 
 August. ‘Civ. Dei,’ vil. 35), Pliny (“Hee 
 XXXVII. 73, &c.). The latter says that “in 
 
vy. 6—18.] 
 
 6 @ And he overtook them, and he 
 spake unto them these same words. 
 
 7 And they said unto him, Where- 
 fore saith my lord these words? God 
 forbid that thy servants should do 
 according to this thing: 
 
 8 Behold, the money, which we 
 found in our sacks’ mouths, we brought 
 again unto thee out of the land of 
 Canaan: how then should we steal 
 out of thy lord’s house silver or gold? 
 
 g With whomsoever of thy servants 
 
 it be found, both let him die, and we 
 also will be my lord’s bondmen. 
 
 10 And he said, Now also /et it be 
 according unto your words: he with 
 whom it is found shall be my servant; 
 and ye shall be blameless. 
 
 11 Then they speedily took down 
 every man his sack to the ground, and 
 opened every man his sack. 
 
 12 And he searched, and began at 
 the eldest, and left at the youngest: 
 and the cup was found in Benjamin’s 
 sack. 
 
 this hydromantia images of the gods were 
 called up.” It was practised either by drop- 
 ping gold, silver, or jewels, into the water, 
 and then examining their appearance; or sim- 
 ply by looking into the water as into a mirror, 
 somewhat probably as the famous Egyptian 
 magician did into the mirror of ink, as men- 
 tioned by the duke of Northumberland and 
 others in the present day. (See Lane, ‘ Mod. 
 Egypt.’ Il. 362.) 
 
 The sacred cup is a symbol of the Nile, 
 into whose waters a golden and silver patera 
 were annually thrown. ‘The Nile itself, both 
 the source and the river, was called ‘‘ the cup 
 Seeeeyie trun. «TH. N.’ viii, 71). ‘This 
 cup of Joseph was of silver, while in ordinary 
 cases the Egyptians drank from vessels of 
 brass (Hecatzus in ‘ Athen.’ xt. 6; Herod. 
 II. 37; see Hivernick, ‘ Introd. to Pentateuch,’ 
 ad h. 1.). 
 
 15. wot ye not that such a man as I can 
 certainly divine?| Joseph here adapts him- 
 self and his language to his character as it 
 would naturally appear in the eyes of his bre- 
 thren. We are not to assume that he actually 
 used magical arts. ‘This would be quite in- 
 consistent with what he said to Pharaoh, ch. 
 xli. 16, disclaiming all knowledge of the fu- 
 ture, save as revealed by God. It has been 
 questioned how far Joseph was justified in the 
 kind of dissimulation which he thus used to 
 his brethren. ‘That he was perfectly justified 
 
 GENES ES. AX Liv. ’ 
 
 13 Then they rent their clothes, 
 and laded every man his ass, and re- 
 turned to the city. 
 
 14 4 And Judah and his brethren 
 came to Joseph’s house; for he was 
 yet there: and they fell before him 
 on the ground. 
 
 15 And Joseph said unto them, 
 What deed 7s this that ye have done? 
 wot ye not that such a man as I can 
 certainly "divine? 
 
 say unto my lord? what shall we 
 speak? or how shall we clear our- 
 selves? God hath found out the ini- 
 quity of thy servants: behold, we are 
 my lord’s servants, both we, and he 
 also with whom the cup is found. 
 
 17 And he said, God forbid that 
 I should do so: Sut the man in whose 
 hand the cup is found, he shall be my 
 servant; and as for you, get you up 
 in peace unto your father. 
 
 18 @ Then Judah came near unto 
 him, and said, Oh my lord, let thy 
 
 in not declaring himself to them until he had 
 tested their repentance and had brought his 
 schemes concerning his father to a point, there 
 can be little doubt. He was never tempted 
 to deny that he was Joseph, for no one sus- 
 pected that he was. In fact he simply pre- 
 served his disguise. But in the present pas- 
 sage he seems to have used words which, 
 though not affirming that he could divine, yet 
 nearly implied as much. It is to be observed, 
 however, that whatever may be thought on 
 this head, Joseph is not held up to us as 
 absolutely perfect. As it was in the case of 
 Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the history is 
 simply told of the events as they occurred. 
 Joseph was a man of singular piety, purity, 
 ‘and integrity, in high favour with Heaven, 
 and even at times inspired to declare the will 
 of God. It does not follow that he was perfect. 
 If inspired apostles were sometimes to be 
 blamed (Gal. i. 11, 13), the holiest patriarchs 
 are not likely to have been incapable of error. 
 If the act was wrong, we must not consider 
 it as the result of Divine guidance, but as 
 the error of a good but fallible man, whilst in 
 the main carrying out the designs of Provi- 
 dence. Making the worst that can be made 
 of it, it is difficult to say that any character in 
 Scripture, save One, (of which at least we have 
 any detailed account) comes out more purely 
 and brightly in the whole course of its history 
 than the character of Joseph. 
 
 aA 
 
 ll Or, 
 
 16 And Judah said, What shall we 73“, 
 
servant, I pray thee, speak a word in 
 my lord’s ears, and let not thine anger 
 burn against thy servant: for thou art 
 even as Pharaoh. ! 
 
 19 My lord asked his servants, say- 
 ing, Have ye a father, or a brother? 
 
 20 And we said unto my lord, We 
 have a father, an old man, and a child 
 of his old age, a little one; and his 
 brother is dead, and he alone is left of 
 his mother, and his father loveth him. 
 
 21 And thou saidst unto thy ser- 
 vants, Bring him down unto me, that 
 I may set mine eyes upon him. | 
 
 22, And we said unto my lord, The 
 lad cannot leave his father: for zf he 
 should leave his father, his father would 
 die. 
 
 23 And thou saidst unto thy ser- 
 
 GENESIS. OSVic OL: 
 
 [v. 19—4- 
 
 not with us; seeing that his life is 
 bound up in the lad’s life; 
 
 31 It shall come to pass, when he 
 seeth that the lad zs not with us, that 
 he will die: and thy servants shall 
 bring down the gray hairs of thy. 
 servant our father with sorrow to the 
 grave. . 
 
 32 For thy servant became surety 
 for the lad unto my father, saying, 
 
 ‘If I bring him not unto thee, then I < chap. 43. 
 
 shall bear the blame to my father for ® 
 ever. 
 
 33 Now therefore, I pray thee, let 
 thy servant abide instead of the lad a 
 bondman to my lord; and let the lad 
 go up with his brethren. 
 
 34 For how shall I go up to my 
 father, and the lad de not with me? 
 lest peradventure I see the evil that 
 
 @ chap. 43. Vants, “Except your youngest brother 
 3. 
 
 come down with you, ye shall see my shall ‘come on my father. t Heb. 
 face no more. oor my 
 24 And it came to pass when we CHAPTER XLV. , 
 came up unto thy servant my father, 1 Joseph maketh himself known to his brethren. 
 . 5 He comforteth them in God’s providence. 
 we told him the words of my lord. g He sendeth for his father. 16 Pharaoh 
 
 25 And our father said, 
 and buy us a little food. 
 
 26 And we said, We cannot go 
 down: if our youngest brother be 
 with us, then will we go down: for 
 we may not see the man’s face, except 
 our youngest brother de with us. 
 
 27 And thy servant my father said 
 unto us, Ye know that my wife bare 
 me two sons? 
 
 O again, 
 
 confirmeth it. 2% Foseph furnisheth them for - 
 their journey, and exhorteth them to concord. 
 25 Jacob is revived with the news. 
 
 HEN Joseph could not refrain 
 | himself before all them that 
 stood by him; and he cried, Cause 
 every man to go out from me. And 
 there stood no man with him, while 
 Joseph made himself known unto his 
 brethren. 
 
 2 And he twept aloud: and the t Heb. 
 Egyptians and the house of Pharaoh jorth nis 
 heard. ceenide: 
 
 3 And Joseph said unto his bre- 
 thren, “I am Joseph; doth my father ¢ Acts 7. 
 yet live? And his brethren could not ** 
 answer him; for they were ' troubled 1 or, 
 
 28 And the one went out from me, 
 
 ’ chap. 37. and I said, ’Surely he is torn in pieces ; 
 33- and I saw him not since: 
 
 29 And if ye take this also from 
 
 me, and mischief befall him, ye shall 
 
 bring down my gray hairs with sorrow 
 
 to the grave. 
 terrified. 
 
 30 Now therefore when I come to 
 thy servant my father, and the lad be 
 
 28. Surely he is torn in pieces| From 
 these words probably for the first time Joseph 
 learns what had been Jacob’s belief as to his 
 son’s fate. 
 
 34. how should I go up to my father] 
 The character of Judah comes out most fa- 
 vourably in this speech. He had, in the first 
 instance, saved Joseph from death, but yet he 
 had proposed the alternative of selling him as 
 
 at his presence. 
 
 4 And Joseph. said unto his bre- 
 
 aslave. He is evidently now much softened ; 
 has witnessed Jacob’s affliction with deep sym- 
 pathy and sorrow, and so has been brought to 
 contrition and repentance. ‘The sight of his 
 repentance finally moves Joseph at once to 
 make himself known to his brethren. 
 
 CHAP. XLV. 2. wept aloud] Lit., as the 
 margin, ‘‘ gave forth his voice in weeping.” 
 
Vv. 5—15.] 
 
 thren, Come near to me, I pray you. 
 And they came near. And he said, 
 I am Joseph your brother, whom ye 
 sold into Egypt. 
 
 _ 5 Now therefore be not grieved, 
 ‘nor angry with panes that ye 
 sold me hither: °for God did send 
 me before you to preserve life. 
 
 6 For these two years hath the 
 famine deen in the land: and yet there 
 are five years, in the which there shall 
 neither Je earing nor harvest. 
 
 7 And God sent me before you 'to 
 you avem- preserve you a posterity in the earth, 
 want. and to save your lives by a great de- 
 
 liverance. 
 
 8 So now :t was not you that sent 
 me hither, but God: and he hath 
 made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord 
 of all his house, and a ruler through- 
 out all the land of Egypt. 
 
 g Haste ye, and go up to my father, 
 and say unto him, ‘hus saith thy son 
 Joseph, God hath made me lord of 
 
 t Heb. 
 neither let 
 there be 
 anger in 
 your eyes. 
 6 chap. 50. 
 20. 
 
 6. earing| t.e. ‘ploughing.” To 
 ‘‘ear” is an old English word from the An- 
 glo-Saxon root erian, ‘*‘to plough,” cognate 
 with the Latin arare. (See Bosworth, ‘ An- 
 glo-Saxon Dict.’ 25k.) It occurs in the Au- 
 thorised Version; Ex. xxxiv. 21; Deut. xxi. 45 
 1 S. viil. 12; Isa. xxx. 24. 
 
 7. to preserve you a posterity in the earth, 
 and to save your lives by a great deliverance | 
 To make you a remnant in the earth 
 (that is, to secure you from utter destruction), 
 and to preserve your lives to a great 
 deliverance (7.e. to preserve life to you, so 
 
 that your deliverance should be great and 
 
 signal). 
 
 8. but God] Lit. ‘‘The God.” That 
 great Personal God, who had led and guard- 
 ed Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and who still 
 watched over the house of Israel. 
 
 a father to Pharaoh] i.e. a wise and confi- 
 ‘dential friend and counsellor. The Caliphs 
 and the Sultan of Turkey appear to have 
 given the same title to their Grand Viziers. 
 (See Burder, ‘Oriental Customs,’ ad h. 1.; 
 Gesen. p. 7; Ros. in loc.). 
 
 10. the land of Goshen] ‘The land of 
 Goshen was evidently a region lying to the 
 north-east of lower Egypt, bounded appa- 
 rently by the Mediterranean on the north, by 
 the desert on the east, by the Tanitic branch 
 of the Nile on the west (hence called ‘‘the 
 
 AT AD NY Dae ibe pewate Dat 
 
 215 
 
 all Egypt: come down unto me, tarry 
 not: 
 10 And thou shalt dwell in the 
 land of Goshen, and thou shalt be 
 near unto me, thou, and thy children, 
 and thy children’s children, and thy 
 flocks, and thy herds, and all that thou 
 hast : 
 
 11 And there will I nourish thee ; 
 for yet there are five years of famine; 
 lest thou, and thy household, and all 
 that thou hast, come to poverty. 
 
 12 And, behold, your eyes see, and 
 the eyes of my brother Benjamin, that. 
 it is my mouth that speaketh unto 
 you. 
 13 And ye shall tell my father of 
 all my glory in Egypt, and of all that 
 ye have seen; and ye shall haste and 
 bring down my father hither. 
 
 14 And he fell upon his brother 
 Benjamin’s neck, and wept; and 
 Benjamin wept upon his neck. 
 
 15 Moreover he kissed all his bre- 
 
 field of Zoan” or Tanis, Ps. Ixxvili. 12, 43), 
 and probably extending south as far as to the 
 head of the Red Sea, and nearly to Memphis. 
 It appears, in Gen. xlvii. 11, to be called the 
 land of Rameses, and the Israelites, before the 
 Exodus, are said to have built in it the cities 
 of Raamses and Pithom (Exod. i. 11). It 
 was probably, though under the dominion of 
 the Pharaohs, only on the confines of Egypt. 
 Hence the LXX. here renders ‘‘ Gesen of 
 Arabia.” In ch. xlvi. 28, where Goshen oc- 
 curs twice, the LXX. call it ‘‘the city of 
 Heroopolis in the land of Ramasses.” Joseph 
 placed his brethren naturally on the confines 
 of Egypt, nearest to Palestine, and yet near 
 himself. It is probable, that either Memphis 
 or Tanis was then the metropolis of Egypt, 
 both of which are in the immediate neigh- 
 bourhood of the region thus marked out. 
 (See Ges. p. 307; Poole, in Smith, ‘Dict. 
 of Bible’ Art. Goshen; Hengstenb. ‘Egypt,’ 
 &c. p. 42 8q.). 
 
 11. and thy household| 'The household of 
 Abraham and of Isaac consisted of many 
 servants and dependents, besides their own 
 families. So Jacob, when he came from Pa- 
 dan-aram, had become ‘‘two bands.” It is 
 probable that some hundreds of dependents 
 accompanied Jacob in his descent into Egypt, 
 and settled with him in Goshen. So again in 
 v. 18, Joseph’s brethren are bidden to take 
 their ‘‘ father and their Aouseholds.” 
 
216 
 
 thren, and wept upon them: and after 
 that his brethren talked with him. 
 
 16 4 And the fame thereof was 
 heard in Pharaoh’s house, saying, 
 Joseph’s brethren are come: and it 
 ' pleased Pharaoh well, and his servants. 
 
 17 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, 
 Say unto thy brethren, This do ye; 
 lade your beasts, and go, get you unto 
 the land of Canaan; 
 
 18 And take your father and your 
 households, and come unto me: and 
 I will give you the good of the land 
 of Egypt, and ye shall eat the fat of 
 the land. 
 
 19 Now thou art commanded, this 
 do ye; take you wagons out of the 
 land of Egypt for your little ones, 
 and for your wives, and bring your 
 father, and come. 
 
 20 Also ‘regard not your stuff; for 
 ‘Haase the good of all the land of Egypt zs 
 spare, &c, yours. 
 
 21 And the children of Israel did 
 so: and Joseph gave them wagons, 
 according to the ‘commandment of 
 Pharaoh, and gave them provision for 
 the way. 
 
 22 ‘To all of them he gave each 
 man changes of raiment; but to Ben- 
 jamin he gave three hundred pieces of 
 silver, and five changes of raiment. 
 yee 23 And to his father he sent after 
 carrying, this manner; ten asses tladen with the 
 
 t Heb. 
 was good 
 in the eyes 
 of Pha- 
 vaoh, 
 
 + Heb, 
 
 tT Heb. 
 gouth. 
 
 24. See that ye fall not out by the way] 
 So all the Versions; but as the word rendered 
 ‘fall out” expresses any violent emotion as 
 of fear or anger, some prefer to render, ‘‘ Be 
 not afraid in the journey;” so Tuch, Baumg., 
 Gesen., and many moderns. ‘The ancient in- 
 terpretation is more probable. They had al- 
 ready travelled on that journey several times 
 without meeting with any evil accident; but 
 there was some danger that they might quar- 
 rel among themselves, now that they were re- 
 conciled to Joseph, perhaps each one being 
 ready to throw the blame of former miscon- 
 duct on the others (Calvin). 
 
 27. wagons| Carts and wagons were 
 known early in Egypt, which was a flat coun- 
 try and highly cultivated; but they were pro- 
 bably unknown at this time in Palestine and 
 Syria. ‘The Egyptian carts, as depicted on 
 the monuments, are of two wheels only, when 
 used for carrying agricultural produce. ‘The 
 
 GE Naiibals:. (Cas Vesey ae 
 
 [v. 16—2, 
 
 good things of Egypt, and ten she asses 
 laden with corn and bread and meat 
 for his father by the way. 
 
 24 So he sent his brethren away, 
 and they departed: and he said unto 
 them, See that ye fall not out by the 
 Way. 
 25 4 And they went up out of 
 Egypt, and came into the land of | 
 Canaan unto Jacob their father, 
 
 26 And told him, saying, Joseph 
 7s yet alive, and he zs governor over 
 all the land of Egypt. And * Jacob’s + Heb. 
 heart fainted, for he believed them not. “* 
 
 27 And they told him all the words 
 of Joseph, which he had said unto 
 them: and when he saw the wagons 
 which Joseph had sent to carry him, 
 the spirit of Jacob their father revived : 
 
 28 And Israel said, /¢ is enough; 
 Joseph my son is yet alive: I will go 
 and see him before I die. 
 
 CHAPTER XDVE 
 1 Facob is comforted by God at Beer-sheba: & 
 Thence he with his company goeth into Egypt. 
 8 The number of his family that went into 
 Ligypt. 29 Foseph meeteth Facob. 31 He 
 instructeth his brethren how to answer to 
 Pharaoh. 
 
 BAe D Israel took his journey with 
 all that he had, and came to 
 Beer-sheba, and offered sacrifices unto 
 the God of his father Isaac. 
 
 2 And God spake unto Israel in 
 the visions of the night, and said, 
 
 four-wheeled car, mentioned by Herodotus, 
 
 was used for carrying the shrine and image 
 
 of adeity. (See Sir G. Wilkinson’s note to 
 Rawlinson’s Herodotus, 11. 63, and the en- 
 graving there.) When Jacob saw the wagons, 
 he knew that they had come from Egypt, and 
 so he believed his sons’ report, and was com- 
 forted. 
 
 Cuap. XLVI. 1. to Beer-sheba, and 
 offered sacrifices, &c.] Here Abraham and 
 Isaac, built altars (ch. xxi. 33, xxvi. 25), and 
 worshipped. Jacob naturally felt it to be a 
 place hallowed by sacred memories, and being 
 anxious as to the propriety of leaving the land 
 of promise and going down into Egypt, he here 
 sacrificed to the God of his fathers, and no 
 doubt sought guidance from Him. Beer- 
 sheba was South of Hebron on the road 
 by which Jacob would naturally travel into 
 
 Egypt. 
 
Vv. 3—12.] 
 
 Jacob, Jacob. And he said, Here 
 am I. 
 
 3 And he said, I am God, the God 
 of thy father: fear not to go down 
 into Egypt; for I will there make of 
 thee a great nation: 
 
 41 will go down with thee into 
 Egypt; and I will also surely bring 
 thee up again: and Joseph shall put 
 his hand upon thine eyes. 
 
 5 And Jacob rose up from Beer- 
 sheba: and the sons of Israel carried 
 Jacob their father, and their little ones, 
 and their wives, in the wagons which 
 Pharaoh had sent to carry him. 
 
 6 And they took their cattle, and 
 their goods, which they had gotten in 
 a 4 the land of Canaan, and came into 
 a Egypt, * Jacob, and all his seed with 
 
 erps2. 4, him: 
 
 GENESISAX IN a 
 
 217 
 
 7 His sons, and his sons’ sons with 
 him, his daughters, and his sons’ 
 daughters, and all his seed brought 
 he with him into Egypt. | 
 
 8 @ And ?these are the names of ¢ Exod. r. 
 the children of Israel, which came into * ©° ™* 
 Egypt, Jacob and his sons: “Reuben, ¢ Numb. 
 Jacob’s firstborn. x Chron. s. 
 
 g And the sons of Reuben; Ha-” 
 noch, and Phallu, and Hezron, and 
 Carmi. 
 
 10 | “And the sons of Simeon; ¢ x04 © 
 Jemuel, and Jamin, and Ohad, and 1 Chron. 4. 
 Jachin, and Zohar, and Shaul the * 
 son of a Canaanitish woman. 
 
 11 ™ And the sons of “Levi; Ger- 67,0" 
 shon, Kohath, and Merari. 
 
 12 4 And the sons of “Judah; Er, “+ Chron. 
 and Onan, and Shelah, and Pharez, & #2. 
 and Zarah: but Er and Onan died in “>> 
 
 3. I am God, the God of thy father] ‘1 
 am E/”—a reference again to the name ‘‘EI- 
 Shaddai,” by which the Most High so specially 
 made covenant with the patriarchs. See on 
 ch. xiii. 14. 
 
 fear not to go down into Egypt] Abraham 
 had gone down there and been in great danger. 
 Isaac had been forbidden to go thither (ch. 
 xxvi. 2). Abraham, Isaac, Jacob had all been 
 placed and settled in Canaan with a promise 
 that they should in future possess the land. 
 Moreover, Egypt was, not only a heathen land, 
 but one in which heathenism was specially de- 
 veloped and systematized. Jacob might there- 
 fore naturally fear to find in it dangers both 
 worldly and spiritual. Hence the promise of 
 God’s presence and protection was signally 
 needed. 
 
 4. Joseph shall put his hand upon thine 
 eyes| ‘The ancients, Gentiles as well as Jews, 
 desired that their dearest relatives should close 
 their eyes in death (Hom. ‘11.’ x1. 453; ‘Od.’ 
 XXIV. 296; Eurip. ‘Hec.’ 430; ‘Phoen.’ 1465 ; 
 Virg. ‘Ain.’ 1x. 487; Ov. ‘Heroid.’ I. 162). 
 
 5. the sons of Israel carried Jacob their 
 father] ‘The scene depicted on the tomb of 
 Chnoumhotep at Beni Hassan cannot be the 
 Egyptian version of the arrival of the Israelites 
 in Egypt; but it is strikingly illustrative of the 
 history of that event. ‘The date of the inscrip- 
 tion is that of the 12th dynasty, which was 
 probably the dynasty under which Joseph lived ; 
 a number of strangers, with beards (which the 
 Egyptians never wore, but which in the sculp- 
 tures indicate uncivilized foreigners), and with 
 dress and physical characteristics belonging to 
 
 the Semitic nomads, appear before the governor | 
 
 offering him gifts. They carry their goods 
 
 with them on asses, have women and children 
 with them, and are armed with bows and clubs. 
 They are described as Absha and his family, 
 and the number 37 is written over in hiero- 
 glyphics. The signs, which accompany the 
 picture, indicate that they were either captives 
 or tributaries. Sir G. Wilkinson, however, 
 has suggested that possibly this indication may 
 result from the contemptuous way in which 
 the Egyptians spoke of all foreigners, and the 
 superiority which they claimed over them. 
 Moreover, they are armed, one of them is play= 
 ing on a lyre, and others bring presents; which 
 things point rather to an immigration than to 
 a captivity. (See Wilkinson, Vol. II. p. 296, 
 and plate. Brugsch, ‘H. E.’ p. 63, where the 
 scene is well engraved, and a good description 
 annexed.) 
 
 7. his daughters} Only one daughter 
 is named and one granddaughter. ‘This verse 
 implies that there were more. Married women 
 would not be mentioned in a Hebrew gene- 
 alogy; hence Jacob’s sons’ wives are not re- 
 counted among the seventy souls that came into 
 Egypt. See v. 26. Dinah remained unmar- 
 ried. Hence she only of Jacob’s daughters is 
 named. 
 
 10. Jemuel] Called Nemuel, Num. xxvi. 
 12; 1 Chron. iv. 24. 
 _ Ohad] Not named in Num. xxvi. 12; 1 Chr. 
 iV. 24. 
 
 Jachin] ‘ Jarib,” 1 Chr. iv. 24. 
 _ Zohar\ ‘“Zerah,” Num. XxvVi. 133 I Chr. 
 IV. 24. 
 
 11. Gershon] ‘Gershom,’ 1 Chr. vi. 16. 
 
 12. And the sons of Pharez were Hezron 
 and Hamul] ‘The difficulties in the chro- 
 
218 
 
 £1 Chron. 
 
 Fails 
 
 # x Chron. 
 
 Pee 
 
 the land of Canaan. And the sons of 
 Pharez were Hezron and Hamul. 
 
 13 {And the sons of Issachar; 
 Tola, and Phuvah, and Job, and 
 Shimron. 
 
 14 @ And the sons of Zebulun; 
 Sered, and Elon, and Jahleel. 
 
 15 These Je the sons of Leah, 
 which she bare unto Jacob in Padan- 
 aram, with his daughter Dinah: all 
 the souls of his sons and his daughters 
 were thirty and three. 
 
 16 ™@ And the sons of Gad; Zi- 
 phion, and Haggi, Shuni, and Ezbon, 
 Eri, and Arodi, and Areli. 
 
 17 4 “And the sons of Asher; Jim- 
 
 SEAINGE Ses Va 
 
 [v. 13—21; 
 
 nah, and Ishuah, and Isui, and Beriah, 
 and Serah their sister: and the sons of 
 Beriah; Heber, and Malchiel. 
 
 18 These are the sons of Zilpah, 
 whom Laban gave to Leah his daugh- 
 ter, and these she bare unto Jacob, 
 even sixteen souls. 
 
 19 The sons of Rachel Jacob’s 
 wife; Joseph, and Benjamin. 
 
 20 “ *And unto Joseph in the land * chap. 42 
 
 of Egypt were born Manasseh and” 
 Ephraim, which Asenath the daughter 
 
 of Poti-pherah ! priest of On bare unto !0r, 
 him. 
 
 21 4 *And the sons of Benjamin Be Chit 
 were Belah, and Becher, and Ashbel,” ”~ “* 
 
 nology of this catalogue have suggested the 
 thought that it did not form a part of the 
 original history of Genesis. The difficul- 
 ties are really no greater than we might expect 
 to find in a document so ancient, and where 
 names and numbers are concerned, which of 
 all things are most likely to puzzle us. In this 
 verse it appears that Er and Onan having died in 
 Canaan, two of Judah’s grandchildren are sub- 
 stituted forthem. It has been said that Hezron 
 and Hamul could not have been born before 
 the descent into Egypt, as the events related 
 in ch. xxxviil. took place after the selling of 
 Joseph, and that, therefore, Pharez could not 
 have been old enough to have two sons at the 
 time of that descent. Moreover, it is argued, 
 that Judah himself could not have been more 
 than 42 at this time, which is inconsistent with 
 the apparent statement that his third son, Pha- 
 rez, not born till after the marriage and death 
 of his two elder brothers, Er and Onan, should 
 himself have had two sons. ‘To this it may be 
 replied, (1), that we must not assume that the 
 events in chap. xxxviii. necessarily took place 
 after those in ch. xxxvii. It is most likely that 
 ch. xxxvili. was introduced episodically at a 
 convenient point in the history, to avoid break- 
 ing the continuity of the story. (See note on 
 XXXVili. I.) (2) Again, if the chronology of 
 the life of Jacob proposed in the note at the 
 end of ch. xxxi. be correct, Judah was, not 42, 
 but 62, at the descent into Egypt, in which case 
 the two sons of Pharez may easily have been 
 born then. (3) Moreover, it is quite possible 
 that the names in this catalogue may have 
 comprised, not only those that were actually 
 of the company, which went down into Egypt, 
 but also all the grandchildren or great grand- 
 children of Jacob born before Jacob’s death. 
 This would not be inconsistent with the com- 
 mon usage of Scripture language, and it would 
 allow 17 years more for the birth of those two 
 grandsons of Judah and for the ten sons of 
 
 Benjamin. Now Judah was probably 79 at 
 Jacob’s death, at which age his son Pharez 
 may easily have had two sons. Indeed, the 
 statement immediately coupled with the names 
 of Hezron and Hamul, viz. that Er and Onan 
 had died in Canaan, seems introduced on pur- 
 pose to account for the reckoning of these 
 grandchildren of Judah, born in Egypt, with 
 others who had been born in Canaan. 
 
 13. Job] Called ‘Jashub’ Num. xxvi. 24; 
 r Chr. vii. 1. 
 
 15. thirty and three| that is, including 
 Jacob himself, but not Er, or Onan, who 
 were dead, nor perhaps Leah. 
 
 16. Ziphion] ‘Zephon’ in Num. xxvi. 15. 
 Exbon] ‘Ozni,’ Num. xxvi. 16. 
 Arodi| ‘Arod,’ Num, xxvi. 17. 
 
 17. Ishuah| Not mentioned in Numbers. 
 Probably he had not left descendants and 
 founded families. 
 
 20. And unto Joseph, &c.]. At the end 
 of this verse the LXX. insert the names of 
 Machir the son of Manasseh, and Galaad the 
 son of Machir, and Sutalaam and ‘Taam the 
 sons of Ephraim, and Edem the son of Suta- 
 laam. (See Numb. xxvi. 28—37; 1 Chr. vii. 
 14.) ‘Thus the whole number of persons be- 
 comes 75. ‘The passage however is not inthe 
 Samaritan, with which the LX X. mostly agrees.. 
 
 21. the sons of Benjamin] ‘These are 
 ten in number. According to Numb. xxvi. 40 
 two of them, Naaman and Ard, were grand- 
 sons of Benjamin. According to the common 
 chronology Benjamin was only 23 at the com- 
 ing into Egypt; an age at which he could 
 hardly have had ten sons, or eight sons and 
 two grandsons, even if he had two wives and 
 some of the children had been twins. ‘The 
 considerations alluded to at v. 12, however, will 
 allow us to calculate that Benjamin was 32 at 
 
 prince. 
 
Were 2—3 4.| 
 
 Gera, and Naaman, Ehi, and Rosh, 
 Muppim, and Huppim, and Ard. | 
 
 22 These are the sons of Rachel, 
 which were born to Jacob: all the 
 souls were fourteen. 
 
 23 { And the sons of Dan; Hu- 
 shim. 
 
 24 4 And the sons of Naphtali; 
 Jahzeel, and Guni, and Jezer, and 
 Shillem. 
 
 25 These are the sons of Bilhah, 
 which Laban gave unto Rachel his 
 daughter, and she bare these unto 
 Jacob: all the souls were seven. 
 
 2Deut.r. 26 “All the souls that came with 
 7 Jacob into Egypt, which came out 
 tHed. of his tloins, besides Jacob’s sons’ 
 thigh, 
 
 wives, all the souls were threescore 
 and six; 
 
 27 And the sons of Joseph, which 
 were born him in Egypt, were two 
 souls: all the souls of the house of 
 Jacob, which came into Egypt, were 
 threescore and ten. 
 
 28 | And he sent Judah before 
 him unto Joseph, to direct his face 
 unto Goshen; and they came into 
 the land of Goshen. 
 
 29 And Joseph made ready his 
 
 GENESIS ALVE 
 
 chariot, and went up to meet Israel 
 
 his father, to Goshen, and presented 
 
 himself unto him; and he fell on his 
 neck, and wept on his neck a good 
 while. . 
 
 30 And Israel said unto Joseph, 
 Now let me die, since I have seen 
 thy face, because thou art yet alive. 
 
 31 And Joseph said unto his bre» 
 thren, and unto his father’s house, 
 I will go up, and shew Pharaoh, and 
 say unto him, My brethren, and my 
 father’s house, which were in the 
 land of Canaan, are come unto me; 
 
 32 And the men are shepherds, 
 
 for ‘their trade hath been to feed t Heb. 
 
 they are 
 men of 
 
 flocks, and their herds, and all that 
 
 cattle; and they have brought their 
 
 they have. 
 
 33 And it shall come to pass, when 
 Pharaoh shall call you, and shall say, 
 What is your occupation? 
 
 34. That ye shall say, Thy servants’ 
 trade hath been about cattle from our 
 youth even until now, both we, and 
 also our fathers: that ye may dwell 
 in the land of Goshen; for every 
 shepherd zs an abomination unto the 
 
 Egyptians. 
 
 the going down to Egypt (see note at the end 
 ‘of ch. xxxi.), and therefore forty-nine at the 
 
 death of Jacob, by which age he might easily 
 have been the father of ten sons. 
 
 Three of Benjamin’s sons, Becher, Gera and 
 Rosh, are wanting in the table given in Num. 
 
 xxvi., probably because they had not left chil- 
 
 dren enough to form independent families. 
 
 Ebi, Muppim, and Huppim] Called ‘ Shup- 
 ham, Hupham, and Ahiram,’ in Num. xxvi. 38, 
 39+ 
 
 27. all the souls of the house of Jacob, 
 avhich came into Egypt, were threescore and 
 ten| ‘The number is made up of the 66 men- 
 tioned in the last verse, Jacob himself, Joseph, 
 and the two sons of Joseph. The LXX. 
 reads here ‘‘’ The sons of Joseph, which were 
 born to him in Egypt, were nine souls. All 
 the souls of the house of Jacob, who came with 
 Jacob into Egypt, were seventy-five.” See 
 above note on verse 20. St Stephen (Acts vil. 
 14) adopts the number 75, probably because 
 he, or St Luke, quotes the LX X. version, as 
 all Greek-speaking Jews would naturally have 
 
 -done; and it may be fairly said, that both 
 
 numbers were equally correct, and that the 
 variation depends on the different mode of 
 
 reckoning. ‘The genealogical tables of the Jews 
 were drawn up on principles unlike those of 
 modern calculation. And there would be no 
 impropriety, on these principles, in reckoning 
 the children of Joseph only, or in adding to 
 them his grandchildren also, especially if the 
 latter became founders of important families 
 in Israel. 
 
 28. he sent Judah before him unto Joseph, 
 to direct his face unto Goshen] i.e. He sent 
 Judah before himself (Jacob) to Joseph, that 
 Joseph might direct him to Goshen. 
 
 34. every shepherd is an abomination unto 
 the Egyptians| Herodotus speaks of the 
 aversion of the Egyptians for swineherds (II. 
 47). ‘The monuments indicate their con- 
 tempt for shepherds and goatherds by the 
 mean appearance always given to them. Nei- 
 ther mutton nor the flesh of goats was ever 
 eaten or offered. Even woollen garments, 
 though sometimes worn over linen, were es- 
 teemed unclean. No priest would wear them. 
 ‘They were never worn in temples, nor were 
 the dead buried in them. ‘To this day, sheep- 
 feeding is esteemed the office of women and 
 slaves. The fact that the Egyptians themselves 
 were great agriculturists, tillers of land, and 
 
 219 
 
220 
 
 CHAPTER XLVII. 
 
 1 Joseph presenteth five of his brethren, 4 and 
 his father, before Pharaoh. 11 He giveth 
 them habitation and maintenance. 13 He 
 getteth all the Egyptians money, 16 their 
 cattle, 18 their lands to Pharaoh. 22 The 
 priests land was not bought. 23 He letteth 
 the land to them for a fifth part. 28 Facob’s age. 
 29 He sweareth Foseph to bury him with his 
 Sathers. 
 
 HEN Joseph came and told 
 
 Pharaoh, and said, My father 
 and my brethren, and their flocks, 
 and their herds, and all that they 
 have, are come out of the land of 
 Canaan; and, behold, they are in the 
 land of Goshen. 
 
 2 And he took some of his bre- 
 thren, even five men, and presented 
 them unto Pharaoh. 
 
 3 And Pharaoh said unto his bre- 
 
 GiEONGESS PSs oval 
 
 [v. 1—9. 
 
 we come; for thy servants have no 
 pasture for their flocks; for the fa- 
 mine zs sore in the land of Canaan: 
 now therefore, we pray thee, let thy 
 servants dwell in the land of Goshen, 
 
 5 And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, 
 saying, Ivhy father and thy brethren 
 are come unto thee: 
 
 6 The land of Egypt zs before 
 thee; in the best of the land make 
 thy father and brethren to dwell; in 
 the land of Goshen let them dwell: 
 and if thou knowest any men of acti- 
 vity among them, then make them 
 rulers over my cattle. 
 
 7 And Joseph brought in Jacob 
 his father, and set him before Pha- 
 raoh: and Jacob blessed Pharaoh. 
 
 8 And Pharaoh said unto Jacob, 
 
 * How old art thou? Fh 
 g And Jacob said unto Pharaoh, 7°” 
 
 3 > many are 
 *'The days of the years of my pil- “e days 
 grimage are an hundred and thirty years of 
 years: few and evil have the days of By rg 
 
 the years of my life been, and have % 13: 
 
 thren, What zs your occupation? 
 And they said unto Pharaoh, Thy 
 servants are shepherds, both we, and 
 also our fathers. 
 
 4 They said moreover unto Pha- 
 rach, For to sojourn in the land are 
 
 that their neighbours the Arab tribes of the 
 desert, with whom they were continually at 
 feud, were nomads only, may have been suffi- 
 cient to cause this feeling. The Egyptians 
 looked on all the people of Egypt as of noble 
 race (Diod. v.58), and on all foreigners as low- 
 born. Hence they would naturally esteem 
 a nomadic people in close proximity to them- 
 selves, and with a much lower civilization 
 than their own, as barbarous and despicable. 
 Whatever be the historical foundation for the 
 existence of three dynasties of Hycsos or Shep= 
 herd-kings extending over a period of from 
 500 tO 1000 years, there can be little doubt 
 that the Egyptians were frequently harassed 
 by incursions from the nomadic tribes in their 
 neighbourhood. Some of these tribes appear 
 to have subdued portions of Lower Egypt and 
 to have fixed their seat of government at 
 ‘Tanis (Zoan), or even at Memphis. ‘The 
 great Hycsos invasion was after the time of 
 Joseph, who probably lived under a Pharaoh 
 of the twelfth dynasty (see Excursus); but 
 the hostility between the Egyptians and the 
 nomad tribes of Asia had no doubt been of 
 long duration. 
 
 Cuap. XLVII. 6. in the best of the land] 
 The modern province of Es-Shurkiyeh, which 
 appears nearly to correspond with the land of 
 Goshen, is said to ‘‘ bear the highest valuation 
 and to yield the largest revenue” of any 
 
 in Egypt. (Robinson, ‘B. R.’ I. p. 78, 79; 
 Kurtz, Vol. 11. p.15.) M.Chabas has collected 
 notices of great interest showing the riches 
 and beauty of the district under the 19th 
 dynasty (‘Mél. Egypt.’ 11.) 
 
 7. and Jacob blessed Pharaoh] Some 
 here render ‘‘ Jacob saluted Pharaoh,” a pos- 
 sible translation, as the Eastern salutation is 
 often with words of blessing: but the natural 
 sense of the word is ‘‘ to bless;” and if Jacob 
 had bowed himself to the ground before Pha- 
 raoh according to a familiar Eastern custom, 
 it would probably have been so related in the 
 history. More probably the aged patriarch, 
 with the conscious dignity of a prophet and 
 the heir of the promises, prayed for blessings 
 upon Pharaoh. 
 
 8. How old art thou?] How many are 
 the days of the years of thy life? 
 
 9. my pilgrimage] Lit. “‘my sojourn- 
 ings.” Pharaoh asked of the days of the years 
 of his life, he replies by speaking of the days 
 of the years of his pilgrimage. Some have 
 thought that he called his life a pilgrimage, 
 because he was a nomad, a wanderer in lands 
 not his own: but in reality the patriarchs 
 spoke of life as a pilgrimage or sojourning, 
 because they sought another country, that is a 
 heavenly (Heb. xi. 9, 13). Earth was not 
 their home, but their journey homewards. 
 
 Jew and evil] ‘The Jews speak of Jacob’s 
 
little ones. 
 
 v. 10—21,] 
 
 not attained unto the days of the 
 years of the life of my fathers in the 
 days of their pilgrimage. 
 
 ro And Jacob blessed Pharaoh, and 
 went out from before Pharaoh. 
 
 11 4 And Joseph placed his father 
 and his brethren, and gave them a 
 possession in the land of Egypt, in 
 the best of the land, in the land of 
 Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded. 
 
 12 And Joseph nourished his fa- 
 ther, and his brethren, and all his 
 
 ior, _ father’s household, with bread, '' ac- 
 Sia cording to their families. 
 
 ah 13 4 And there was no bread in 
 according all the land; for the famine was very 
 
 sore, so that the land of Egypt and 
 all the land of Canaan fainted by rea- 
 son of the famine. 
 
 14 And Joseph gathered up all the 
 money that was found in the land of 
 Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, 
 for the corn which they bought: and 
 Joseph brought the money into Pha- 
 raoh’s house. 
 
 15 And when money failed in the 
 land of Egypt, and in the land of 
 Canaan, all the Egyptians came unto 
 Joseph, and said, Give us bread: for 
 why should we die in thy presence? 
 for the money faileth. 
 
 seven afflictions: (1) the persecution of Esau; 
 (2) the injustice of Laban; (3) the result of 
 his wrestling with the Angel; (4) the viola- 
 tion of Dinah; (5) the loss of Joseph; (6) 
 the imprisonment of Simeon; (7) the depar- 
 ture of Benjamin for Egy 
 well have added the death of Rachel and the 
 incest of Reuben (Schumann). 
 
 11. the land of Rameses| In Ex. 1. 11, 
 the Israelites are said to have built treasure 
 cities for Pharaoh, Pithom and Raamses. It 
 is possible that Goshen is here called the land 
 of Rameses by anticipation, as it may have 
 become familiarly known to the Israelites by 
 the name ‘land of Rameses” after they had 
 built the city Rameses in it. Very probably, 
 however, the Israelites in the captivity only 
 fortified and strengthened the city of Rameses 
 then already existing, and so fitted it to bea 
 strong treasure-city. ‘The name Rameses be-= 
 came famous in after times from the exploits 
 of Rameses II., a king of the rgth dynasty : 
 but he was of too late a date to have given 
 name to a city, either in the time of Joseph, 
 or even at the time of the Exodus, Rameses, 
 
 GENESIS. XLVII. 
 
 pt. They might - 
 
 16 And Joseph said, Give your 
 cattle; and I will give you for your 
 cattle, if money fail. 
 
 17 And they brought their cattle 
 unto Joseph: and Joseph gave them 
 bread in exchange for horses, and for 
 the flocks, and for the cattle of the 
 herds, and for the asses : 
 them with bread for all their cattle 
 for that year. 
 
 18 When that year was ended, 
 they came unto him the second year, 
 and said unto him, We will not hide 
 it from my lord, how that our money 
 is spent; my lord also hath our herds 
 of cattle; there is not ought left in 
 the sight of my lord, but our bodies, 
 and our lands: 
 
 19 Wherefore shall we die before 
 thine eyes, both we and our land? 
 buy us and our land for bread, and 
 we and our land will be servants unto 
 Pharaoh: and give us seed, that we 
 may live, and not die, that the land 
 be not desolate. 
 
 20 And Joseph bought all the land 
 of Egypt for Pharaoh; for the Egyp- 
 tians sold every man his field, because 
 the famine prevailed over them: so 
 the land became Pharaoh’s. 
 
 21 And as for the people, he re- 
 
 according to the LX X. corresponded with the 
 Heroopolis of after times. (See on this city 
 Hengstenberg, ‘ Egypt,’ p. 51, and Excursus 
 at the end of the volume.) 
 
 12. according to their families] Lit. ‘‘to 
 the mouth of their children;” meaning very 
 probably, ‘teven to the food for their chil- 
 dren.” 
 
 20. Joseph bought all the land of Egypt 
 for Pharaoh| All the main points in_ the 
 statements of this chapter are confirmed by 
 Herodotus, Diodorus, Strabo, and the monu- 
 ments. Herodotus (II. 109) says that Sesos- 
 tris divided the soil among the inhabitants, 
 assigning square plots of land of equal size 
 to all, and obtained his revenue from a rent 
 paid annually by the holders. Diodorus (1. 54) 
 says that Sesodsis divided the whole country 
 into 36 nomes and set nomarchs over each to 
 take care of the royal revenue and administer 
 their respective provinces. Strabo (XVII. p. 
 787) tells us that the occupiers of land held 
 it subject to a rent. Again, Diodorus (1593; 
 74) represents the land as possessed only by 
 the priests, the king, and the warriors, which 
 
 aay 
 
 t t Heb. 
 and he fed led thent, 
 
222 
 
 1 Or, 
 
 princes. 
 
 moved them to cities from one end 
 of the borders of Egypt even to the 
 other end thereof. 
 
 22 Only the land of the ! priests 
 bought he not; for the priests had 
 a portion assigned them of Pharaoh, 
 and did eat their portion which Pha- 
 raoh gave them: wherefore they sold 
 not their lands. 
 
 23 Then Joseph said unto the peo- 
 ple, Behold, I have bought you this 
 day and your land for Pharaoh: lo, 
 here is seed for you, and ye shall sow 
 the land. 
 
 testimony is confirmed by the sculptures 
 (Wilkinson, I. p. 263). ‘The discrepancy of 
 this from the account in Genesis is apparent 
 in the silence of the latter concerning the 
 lands assigned to the warrior caste. ‘The re- 
 servation of their lands to the priests is ex- 
 pressly mentioned in v. 22; but nothing is 
 said of the warriors. ‘There was, however, 
 a marked difference in the tenure of land by 
 the warriors from that by the priests. Hero- 
 dotus (II. 168) says that each warrior had 
 assigned to him twelve arure of land (each 
 arura being a square of 100 Egyptian cu- 
 bits); that is to say, there were no landed 
 possessions vested in the caste, but certain 
 fixed portions assigned to each person: and 
 these, as given by the sovereign’s will, so 
 apparently were liable to be withheld or 
 taken away by the same will; for we find 
 that Sethos, the contemporary of Sennacherib 
 and therefore of Hezekiah and Isaiah, actu- 
 ally deprived the warriors of these lands, 
 which former kings had conceded to them 
 (Herod. 11. 141). It is therefore, as Knobel 
 remarks, highly probable that the original 
 reservation of their lands was only to the 
 priests, and that the warrior caste did not 
 come into possession of their twelve arure 
 each, till after the time of Joseph. In the 
 other important particulars the sacred and 
 profane accounts entirely tally, viz. that, by 
 royal appointment, the original proprietors of 
 the land became crown tenants, holding their 
 land by payment of a rent or tribute; whilst 
 the priests only were left in full possession of 
 their former lands and revenues. As to the 
 particular king to whom this is attributed by 
 Herodotus and Diodorus, Lepsius (‘ Chronol, 
 Egypt.’ I. p. 304) supposes that this was not 
 the Sesostris of Manetho’s rath dynasty 
 (Osirtasen of the Monuments), but a Sethos 
 or Sethosis of the 19th dynasty, whom he 
 considers to be the Pharaoh of Joseph. ‘The 
 tgth dynasty is, however, certainly much too 
 late a date for Joseph. It may be a question 
 whether the division of the land into 36 
 
 GENESIS, XLVIL. 
 
 [v. 22—26, 
 
 24 And it shall come to pass in 
 the increase, that ye shall give the 
 fifth part unto Pharaoh, and four. 
 parts shall be your own, for seed of 
 the field, and for your food, and for 
 them of your households, and for food 
 for your little ones. 
 
 25 And they said, ‘Chou hast saved 
 our lives: let us find grace in the 
 sight of my lord, and we will be. 
 Pharaoh’s servants. 
 
 26 And Joseph made it a law over 
 the land of Egypt unio this day, that 
 Pharaoh should have the fifth part; 
 
 nomes and into square plots of equal size by 
 Sesostris be the same transaction as the pur- 
 chasing and restoring of the land by Joseph. 
 ‘The people were already in possession of 
 their property when Joseph bought it, and 
 they received it again on condition of paying 
 a fifth of the produce as a rent. But whether 
 or not this act of Sesostris be identified with 
 that of Joseph (or the Pharaoh of Joseph), 
 the profane historians and the monuments com- 
 pletely bear out the testimony of the author 
 of Genesis as to the condition of land tenure 
 and its origin in an exercise of the sovereign’s 
 authority. 
 
 21. he removed them to cities} He had 
 collected all the corn, which he had stored 
 up for the famine, into the various cities of 
 Egypt, and so he removed the people into the 
 cities and their neighbourhood, that he might 
 the better provide them with food (Schum.). 
 
 22. Only the land of the priests bought he 
 not| See on v. 20. 
 
 the priests had a portion assigned them of 
 Pharaoh, and did eat their portion which Pha- 
 raoh gave them] ‘This does not mean that 
 the priests were Pharaoh’s stipendiaries, which 
 would be inconsistent with the immediately 
 preceding words, as well as with the statement 
 of profane authors as to the landed possessions 
 of the priests. On the contrary, it means, 
 that Pharaoh had such respect for the minis-. 
 ters of religion, that, instead of suffering 
 Joseph to sell corn to them and so to buy up 
 their land, he ordered a portion of corn to 
 be regularly distributed to them during the 
 famine, and so they were not reduced to the 
 necessity of selling their lands. ‘This regard 
 for the priests is expressly assigned to Pha- 
 raoh, not to Joseph, and so there can be no 
 need to apologize for Joseph’s respect to an 
 idolatrous priesthood, 
 
 26. Joseph made it a law] The final 
 result of Joseph’s policy was that the land 
 was restored to the Egyptians, with an obli- 
 gation to pay one fifth of it to Pharaoh for the 
 
v. 27—1.| 
 
 except the-land of the ' priests only, 
 
 * which became not Pharaoh’s. 
 
 27 { And Israel dwelt in the land 
 of Egypt, in the country of Goshen; 
 and they had possessions therein, and 
 grew, and multiplied exceedingly. 
 
 28 And Jacob lived in. the land of 
 
 ‘Heb. Egypt seventeen years: so ‘the whole 
 “ge age of Jacob was an hundred forty 
 ears of and seven years. 
 
 29 And the time drew nigh that 
 Israel must die: and he called his son 
 Joseph, and said unto him, If now 
 I have found grace in thy sight, 
 “put, I pray thee, thy hand under 
 
 my thigh, and deal kindly and truly 
 with me; bury me not, I pray thee, 
 in Egypt: 
 
 30 But I will lie with my fathers, 
 
 purpose of maintaining the revenues of the 
 state. Much has been written in condemna- 
 tion, and again in vindication of these pro- 
 ceedings. Was Joseph a mere creature of 
 Pharaoh’s, desirous only of his master’s ag~ 
 grandizement? or was he bent on establishing 
 a tyrannical absolutism in violation of the 
 rights and liberties of the subject? ‘The bre- 
 vity of the narrative and our imperfect ac- 
 quaintance with the condition of the people 
 and the state of agriculture in ancient Egypt 
 make it impossible fully to judge of the wis- 
 dom and equity of Joseph’s laws. ‘This much, 
 however, is quite evident. ‘The land in favour- 
 able years was very productive. In the plente- 
 ous years it brought forth by handfuls (ch. 
 xli. 47). Even the fifth part of the revenue of 
 corn (v. 34) was so abundant that it is de- 
 scribed as like ‘‘the sand of the sea,” and 
 ‘‘without number” (v. 49). Yet there was a 
 liability to great depression, as shewn by the 
 seven years of famine: the monuments too in- 
 dicate the frequent occurrence of scarcity, and 
 there was evidently no provision against this 
 in the habits of the people or the management 
 of the tillage. If Pharaoh had not been moved 
 to store up corn against the famine years, the 
 population would most probably have perished. 
 The peculiar nature of the land, its dependence 
 on the overflow of the Nile, and the unthrifty 
 habits of the cultivators, made it desirable to. 
 establish a system of centralization, perhaps to 
 introduce some general principle of irrigation, 
 in modern phraseology, to promote the pros- 
 perity of the country by great government 
 works, in preference to leaving all to the uncer= 
 tainty of individual enterprize. If this was so, 
 then the saying, ‘‘’‘Thou hast saved our lives,” 
 was. no language of Eastern adulation, but the 
 verdict of a grateful people. 
 
 GENESIS, eX GV Sey 11. 223 
 
 and thou shalt carry me out of Egypt, 
 and bury me in their buryingplace. 
 And he said, I will do as thou hast 
 said. 
 
 31 And he said, Swear unto: me. 
 
 And he sware unto him. And ‘Is- «Heb. 11, 
 
 rael bowed himself upon the bed’s ** 
 head. 
 
 CHAPTER XLVIII. 
 1 Joseph with his sons visiteth his sick father. 
 2 Jacob strengtheneth himself to bless them. 3 
 fle repeateth the promise. § He taketh 
 
 Ephraim and Manasseh as his own. 7 He 
 telleth Foseph of his mother’s grave. 9 He 
 blesseth Ephraim and Manasseh. 17 He 
 
 preferreth the younger before the elder. 
 fle prophesieth their return to Canaan, 
 ND it came to pass after these 
 things, that ove told Joseph, 
 Behold, thy father zs sick: and he 
 
 21 
 
 The ‘fifth part” which was paid to Pha- 
 raoh for the revenues of the state, and perhaps 
 for public works of all kinds, agricultural 
 and others, was not an exorbitant impost. 
 The Egyptians appear to have made no diffi- 
 culty in paying one-fifth of the produce of 
 their land. to Pharaoh during the years of 
 plenty; and hence we may infer that it would 
 not have been a burdensome rent when the 
 system of agriculture was put on a better 
 footing. 
 
 28. the whole age of Jacob] Lit. the 
 days of Jacob, eventhe years of his life. 
 
 29. bury me not...in Egypt] Jacob had 
 a firm faith that his descendants should inherit 
 the land of Canaan, and therefore desired to 
 be buried there. Moreover, he very probably 
 wished to direct the minds of his children to 
 that as their future home, that they might be 
 kept from setting up their rest in Egypt. 
 
 831. bowed himself upon the bed’s head) 
 So the Masorites point it. So the Targg., 
 Symm., Aquila, Vulg., but the LXX., Syr., 
 and Epistle to the Hebrews (xi. 21), read ‘‘ on 
 the top of his staff.” ‘The Hebrew word with- 
 out the vowel points means either ‘‘ bed” or 
 ‘“¢ staff.’ ‘The only distinction is in the vowel 
 points, which do not exist in the more ancient 
 MSS. It is therefore impossible to decide 
 with certainty which was the original sense of 
 the word. It is quite possible that the mean- 
 ing is, as the Apostle quotes the passage, that 
 after Joseph had sworn to bury him in Ca- 
 naan, Jacob bowed himself upon the staff 
 which had gone with him through all his wan- 
 derings (Gen. xxxii. 10), and so worshipped 
 God. And this seems the more likely from 
 the fact that it is not till after these things 
 that one told Joseph, ‘‘ Behold, thy father’ is 
 
224 
 
 took with him his two sons, Manas- 
 seh and Ephraim. 
 
 2 And one told Jacob, and said, 
 Behold, thy son Joseph cometh unto 
 thee: and Israel strengthened himself, 
 and sat upon the bed. 
 
 And Jacob said unto Joseph, 
 God Almighty appeared unto me at 
 -@Tuz in the land of Canaan, and 
 blessed me, 
 
 4 And said unto me, Behold, I 
 will make thee fruitful, and multiply 
 thee, and I will make of thee a mul- 
 titude of people; and will give this 
 land to thy seed after thee for an 
 everlasting possession. 
 
 5 4 And now thy “two sons, Eph- 
 raim and Manasseh, which were born 
 unto thee in the land of Egypt before 
 I came unto thee into Egypt, are 
 ‘mine; as Reuben and Simeon, they 
 
 shall be mine. 
 
 6 And thy issue, which thou be- 
 gettest after them, shall be thine, and 
 shall be called after the name of their 
 brethren in their inheritance. 
 
 sick” (ch. xlvili. r), so that Jacob probably 
 
 had not as yet taken to his bed. At the same 
 time we must not always press the quotations 
 in the New ‘Testament as proof of the true 
 sense of the Hebrew original, for it is natu- 
 ral for the Apostles to quote the LXX. as 
 being the Authorised Version, just as modern 
 divines quote modern versions in the vernacu= 
 lar languages without suggesting a correction 
 of their language, when such correction is un= 
 necessary for their argument. 
 
 CuAp. XLVIII. 3. God Almighty] * El- 
 Shaddai.” See on ch. xliii. 14. 
 
 at Luz] i.e. Bethel. See ch, xxvili. 17, 19, 
 XXXV. 6, 7. 
 
 5. as Reuben and Simeon, they shall be 
 mine| ‘Thy two sons shall be as much count- 
 ed to be my sons, as Reuben and Simeon, my 
 own two eldest sons, are counted to be mine ; 
 accordingly Ephraim and Manasseh became 
 patriarchs, eponymi, heads of tribes. Some 
 think that, as Reuben was deprived of his 
 birthright, so here the birthright is given to 
 Ephraim, the elder son of the firstborn of 
 Rachel. But the birthright seems rather to 
 have been transferred to Judah, his three 
 elder brothers being disinherited, the first for 
 incest, the other two for cruelty (see ch. xlix, 
 8-10). Accordingly, Judah became the royal 
 tribe, from whom as concerning the flesh 
 
 GENESIS. XLVIIL 
 
 [v. 2—I12, 
 
 7 And as for me, when I came 
 
 from Padan, ‘Rachel died by me in ¢ chap. 3; 
 
 the land of Canaan in the way, when *% — 
 yet there was but a little way to come 
 unto Ephrath: and I buried her there 
 in the way of Ephrath; the same zs 
 Beth-lehem. 
 
 8 And Israel beheld Joseph’s sons, 
 and said, Who are these? 
 
 g And Joseph said unto his father, 
 ‘They are my sons, whom God hath 
 given me in this place. And he said, 
 Bring them, I pray thee, unto me, 
 and I will bless them. 
 
 10 Now the eyes of Israel were 
 *dim for age, so that he could not see. + Heb. 
 And he brought them near unto him ; 
 and he kissed them, and embraced 
 them. 
 
 11 And Israel said unto Joseph, I 
 had not thought to see thy face: and, 
 lo, God hath shewed me also thy 
 seed, 
 
 12 And Joseph brought them out 
 from between his knees, and he bowed 
 himself with his face to the earth. 
 
 Christ came, who is over all God blessed for 
 ever. ‘There was, however, a kind of se- 
 condary birthright given to Ephraim (see xlix. 
 22 8q.), who became ancestor of the royal 
 tribe among the ten tribes of Israel, 
 
 6. shall be called after the name of their 
 brethren| Shall not give names to separate 
 tribes, but shall be numbered with the tribes 
 of Ephraim and Manasseh, We hear nothing 
 of any younger sons of Joseph, and do not 
 know for certain that any were born to him; 
 but it has been thought that they may be men- 
 tioned in Num, xxvi. 28—37, 1 Chr. vii. 
 T4—29. 
 
 7. Rachel died by me] When adopting 
 the sons of Joseph, Jacob turns his thoughts 
 back to his beloved Rachel, for whose sake 
 especially he had so dearly loved Joseph. Ro- 
 senm., Gesenius and some others propose to 
 translate here ‘‘Rachel died to my sorrow,” 
 lit. ‘‘upon me,” and therefore as a heavy 
 burden to me; but the received tfanslation is 
 supported by the Versions, and by the frequent 
 use of the preposition in the sense of ‘‘near 
 me,” ‘‘by my side.” 
 
 12. Joseph brought them out from bex 
 tween his knees| Joseph brought them out 
 from between Jacob’s knees, where they had 
 gone that he might embrace them, and pro= 
 bably placed them in a reverent attitude to 
 receive the patriarch’s blessing. 
 
 heavy. 
 
Heb, 11. 
 
 ¥, 13-2 2.] 
 
 13 And Joseph took them both, 
 Ephraim in his right hand toward 
 Israel’s left hand, and Manasseh in 
 his left hand toward Israel’s right 
 hand, and brought them near unto him. 
 
 14 And Israel stretched out his 
 right hand, and laid zt upon Eph- 
 raim’s head, who was the younger, 
 and his left hand upon Manasseh’s 
 head, guiding his hands wittingly ; for 
 Manasseh was the firstborn. 
 
 15 { And “he blessed Joseph, and 
 said, God, before whom my fathers 
 Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God 
 which fed me all my life long unto 
 this day, 
 
 16 The Angel which redeemed me 
 from all evil, bless the lads; and let 
 my name be named on them, and the 
 name of my fathers Abraham and 
 Isaac; and let them ‘grow into a 
 multitude in the midst of the earth. 
 
 17 And when Joseph saw that his 
 father laid his right hand upon the 
 head of Ephraim, it displeased him: 
 and he held up his father’s hand, to 
 
 and he bowed himself with his face to the 
 earth| i.e. Joseph bowed down respectfully 
 and solemnly before his father. The LXX. 
 has ‘They bowed themselves,” which differs 
 but by the repetition of one letter from the 
 received reading. 
 
 14. guiding his hands wittingly] So Ge- 
 sen., Rosenm., and most modern interpreters; 
 but the LXX. Vulg. &c. ‘‘putting his hands 
 crosswise.” ‘This has been defended by some, 
 comparing an Arabic root, which has the 
 sense ‘‘to bind, to twist,” but it cannot be 
 shewn ever to have had the sense ‘‘to cross.” 
 
 16. The Angel which redeemed me from 
 all evil| ‘There is here a triple blessing: 
 
 ‘The God, before whom my fathers walked, 
 
 “The God, which fed me like a shepherd, all 
 my life long, 
 
 ‘The Angel, which redeemed (or redeemeth 
 me) from all evil.” 
 
 It is impossible that the Angel thus identified 
 with God can be a created Angel. Jacob, 
 no doubt, alludes to the Angel who wrestled 
 with him and whom he called God (ch. xxxii. 
 24—30), the same as the Angel of the Cove- 
 nant, Mal. iii. r. Luther observes that the 
 verb ‘‘bless,” which thus refers to the God of 
 his fathers, to the God who had been his 
 Shepherd, and to the Angel who redeemed 
 him, is in the singular, not in the plural, 
 
 Vou. I. 
 
 Cee loi wv TEL 
 
 remove it from Ephraim’s head unto 
 Manasseh’s head. 
 
 18 And Joseph said unto his fa- 
 ther, Not so, my father: for this zs 
 the firstborn; put thy right hand upon 
 his head. 
 
 1g And his father refused, and said, 
 I know it, my son, I know it: he 
 also shall become a people, and he 
 also shall be great: but truly his 
 younger brother shall be greater than 
 
 he, and his seed shall become a 'mul- t Heb. 
 Sulness. 
 
 titude of nations. 
 
 20 And he blessed them that day, 
 saying, In thee shall Israel bless, say- 
 ing, God make thee as Ephraim and 
 as Manasseh: and he set Ephraim 
 before Manasseh. 
 
 21 And Israel said unto Joseph, 
 Behold, I die: but God shall be with 
 you, and bring you again unto the 
 land of your fathers. 
 
 22 Moreover I have given to thee 
 one portion above thy brethren, which 
 I took out of the hand of the Amorite 
 with my sword and with my bow. 
 
 showing that these three are but one God, and 
 that the Angel is one with the fathers’ God 
 and with the God who fed Jacob like a sheep. 
 
 22. Moreover I have given to thee one 
 portion] ‘There is little doubt but that this 
 rendering is correct. ‘The past tense is used 
 by prophetic anticipation, and the meaning is, 
 ‘*T have assigned to thee one portion of that 
 land, which my descendants are destined to 
 take out of the hands of the Amorites.” ‘The 
 word rendered portion is Shechem, meaning 
 literally ‘‘a shoulder,” thence probably a ridge 
 or neck of land, hence here rendered by most 
 versions and commentators ‘‘portion.” She- 
 chem, the city of Samaria, was probably named. 
 from the fact of its standing thus on a ridge 
 or shoulder of ground. (See on Gen. xii. 6.) 
 Accordingly here the LX X., ‘Targ. of Pseudo- 
 Jonath., as also Calvin, Rosenm., and some 
 moderns, have rendered not ‘‘portion,” but 
 ‘‘Shechem,” a proper name. ‘The history of 
 Shechem is doubtless much mixed up with the 
 history of the Patriarchs, and was intimately 
 connected with all their blessings. It was 
 Abraham’s first settlement in Palestine, and 
 there he first built an altar (ch. xii. 6). ‘There 
 too Jacob purchased a piece of ground from 
 Hamor the father of Shechem, and built an 
 altar (xxxili. 1320). This was, however, 
 not “taken out of the hand of the Amorite 
 with sword and bow,” but obtained peaceably 
 
 P 
 
226 
 
 CHAPTER XLIX. 
 
 1 Yacob calleth his sons to bless them. 3 Their 
 blessing in particular. 29 He chargeth them 
 about his burial. 33 He dieth. 
 
 ND Jacob called unto his sons, 
 and said, Gather yourselves to- 
 gether, that I may tell you that which 
 shall befall you in the last days. 
 2 Gather yourselves together, and 
 hear, ye sons of: Jacob; and hearken 
 unto Israel your father. 
 
 by purchase. Some have thought therefore 
 that the allusion is to the victory over the 
 Shechemites by Simeon and Levi related in 
 ch. xxxiv., the Shechemites being here called 
 Amorites, though there Hivites, because Am-~ 
 orite was a generic name, like Canaanite: but 
 it is hardly likely that Jacob should boast of a 
 conquest by his sons, as though it were his 
 own, when he strongly reprobated their action 
 in it, and even ‘‘cursed their anger, for it was 
 fierce, and their wrath, for it was cruel” (ch, 
 xlix. 7). Though, therefore, it is undoubtedly 
 told us, that Jacob gave Shechem to Joseph, 
 and that Joseph was therefore buried there 
 (Josh. xxiv. 32; John iv. 5. See also Je- 
 rome, ‘Qu. in Gen.’ xhx.); and though there 
 may be some allusion to this gift in the words 
 here made use of, by a paronomasia so com- 
 mon in Hebrew, it is most likely that the 
 rendering of the Authorised Version is correct. 
 The addition of ‘‘one”’ to ‘‘portion” seems to 
 decide for this interpretation.. ‘‘] have given 
 thee one Shechem,” would be very hard to 
 interpret. 
 
 Cuap. XLIX. 1. in the last days] ‘The 
 future generally, but with special reference to 
 the times of Messiah. ‘The Rabbi Nachmani- 
 des says, ‘‘ According to the words of all, the 
 last days denote the days of Messiah.” ‘The 
 passages in which it occurs are mostly Messi- 
 anic predictions (see Num. xxiv. 14; Isa. li. 2; 
 er. xxx.\243 Ezek. xxxvili, 163 Dans x.14; 
 Hos. ii. 5; Mic. iv. 1). ‘The exact words of 
 the LXX. are used in Heb. i. 1, and virtually 
 the same in Acts li. 17; 2 Tim. iii. 13 r Pet. 1. 
 20; 2 Pet. ili. 3, where the reference is to the 
 times of Christ. (See Heidegger, Vol. 1. 
 XXIII. 6; Gesen. ‘hes.’ p. 73.) The pro- 
 phecy of Jacob does not refer exclusively to 
 the days of Messiah, but rather sketches gene- 
 rally the fortunes of his family; but all is 
 leading up to that which was to be the great 
 consummation, when the promised Seed should 
 come and extend the blessings of the Spiritual 
 Israel throughout all the world. It is to be 
 carefully noted, that the occupation of Canaan 
 by the twelve tribes under Joshua was not the 
 point to which his expectations pointed as an 
 
 «~GHNESTS) ene. [ve 15. 
 
 3% Reuben, thou art my firstborn, 
 my might, and the beginning of my 
 strength, the excellency of dignity, 
 and the excellency of power: donste” 
 4 Unstable as water, ‘thou shalt 73%, , 
 
 not excel; because thou “wentest up oY 
 to thy father’s bed; then defiledst 1 7 
 T, 
 
 } i 
 thou zt: 'he went up to my couch. my couch 
 5 {1 Simeon and Levi are brethren ; #407. 
 
 1: } .? | Or, thei 
 instruments of cruelty are in their so , 
 . ° weapons 
 habitations. violet 
 
 end, but rather that from which his predic- 
 tions took their beginning. It was not the 
 terminus ad quem, but the terminus a quo. 
 The return to Canaan was a fact established in 
 the decrees of Providence, the certainty of 
 which rested on promises given and repeated 
 to the Patriarchs, Jacob therefore does not 
 repeat this, farther than by the injunction, in 
 the last chapter, and again at the end of this, 
 that he should be buried, not in Egypt, but 
 at Machpelah, the buryingplace of his fathers. 
 
 3. the beginning of my strength] Some 
 important Versions (Aquila, Symm., Vulg.) 
 render ‘‘ the beginning of my sorrow,” a pos- 
 sible translation, but not suited to the parallel- 
 isms. For the expression, as applied to first- 
 born sons, comp. Deut. xxi. 17; Ps. xxviii. 
 57, Cy. 36. 
 
 4. Unstable as water] or “boiling over 
 like water.” The meaning of the word is 
 uncertain. ‘The same root in Syriac expresses 
 ‘*wantonness ;” in Arabic, ‘‘ pride,” ‘ swelling 
 arrogance.” In this passage it is clearly con- 
 nected with water. ‘The Vulgate translates, 
 ‘Thou art poured out like water.” Symma- 
 chus renders ‘‘Thou hast boiled over like 
 water.” ‘The translation of the LX X. is pecu- 
 liar, but it also seems to point to boiling as 
 well as to the insolence of pride (退vBpicas ws 
 vdap, py eéxCéons). Modern lexicographers 
 (as Gesen., Lee, &c.) generally give ‘boiling 
 over.” 
 
 thou shalt not excel} Perhaps, though, 
 through thy swelling wantonness, thou risest 
 up like water when it boils, yet it shall not be 
 so as to excel and surpass thy brethren. Not 
 one great action, not one judge, prophet, or 
 leader from the tribe of Reuben is ever men- 
 tioned in history. 
 
 then defiledst thou it] **'Thou hast polluted” 
 or ‘‘ desecrated it.” 
 
 5. instruments of cruelty are in their ha- 
 bitations| Probably, ‘‘ Their swords are in- 
 struments of violence;” so the Vulg., several 
 Rabbins, and the most eminent moderns. ‘The 
 word occurs only here, is very variously ren- 
 dered by the Versions, and is of doubtful deri- 
 vation. 
 
dr, 
 ughea 
 ‘CH. 
 
 7. 6—1 0. | 
 
 6 O my soul, come not thou into 
 their secret; unto their assembly, 
 mine honour, be not thou united: 
 for in their anger they slew a man, 
 and in their selfwill they 'digged down 
 a wall. 
 
 7 Cursed de their anger, for zt was 
 fierce; and their wrath, for it was 
 cruel: I will divide them in Jacob, 
 and scatter them in Israel. 
 
 8 {@ Judah, thou art he whom thy 
 
 6. mine honour| Probably a synonym 
 for ‘‘my soul” in the first clause of the paral- 
 lelism. ‘The soul as being the noblest part of 
 man is called his glory. See Ps. viii. 5 (6 
 Heb.), xvi. 9, xxx. 12 (13 Heb.), lvii. 8 (g 
 Heb.), cvili. 1(2 Heb.) ; (Ges. ‘Thes.’ p. 655). 
 
 digged down a wall] Hamstrung an ox. 
 So the margin ‘‘houghed oxen.” ‘The singu- 
 lar ‘‘an ox” must be used to retain the paral- 
 lelism with ‘‘a man” in the former clause, 
 both have a collective intention. ‘This is the 
 rendering of the LXX. and gives the com- 
 moner sense of the verb. It is therefore adopt- 
 ed by most recent commentators. The same 
 Hebrew word, with a distinction only in the 
 vowel point, means ‘‘ ox”’ and ‘‘ wall.” 
 
 7. I will divide them in Jacob, and scat- 
 ter them in Israel] ‘This was most literally 
 fulfilled, for when Canaan was conquered, on 
 the second numbering under Moses, the tribe 
 of Simeon had become the weakest of all the 
 tribes (Numb. xxvi. 14); in Moses’ blessing 
 (Deut. xxxiii.) it is entirely passed over; and 
 in the assignment of territory it was merely 
 mingled or scattered among the tribe of Ju- 
 dah, having certain cities assigned it within the 
 limits of Judah’s possession (Josh. xix. I—9); 
 whilst the Levites had no separate inheritance, 
 but merely a number of cities to dwell in, scat- 
 tered throughout the possessions of their bre- 
 
 thren (Josh. xxi. r—40). With regard to 
 
 the latter, though by being made dependent on 
 the tithes and also on the liberality of their fel- 
 low countrymen, they were punished, yet in 
 process of time the curse was turned into a 
 blessing. (See Mede, ‘ Works,’ Bk. 1. Disc. 
 xxxv.) Of this transformation of the curse 
 into a blessing there is not the slightest intima- 
 tion in Jacob’s address: and in this we have a 
 strong proof of its genuineness. After this 
 honourable change in the time of Moses (due 
 in great part to the faithfulness of Moses him- 
 self and of the Levites with him), it would 
 never have occurred to the forger of a pro- 
 phecy to cast such a reproach, and to foretell 
 such a judgment on the forefather of the Le- 
 vites. In fact, how different is the blessing 
 pronounced by Moses himself upon the tribe 
 of Levi in Deut. xxxiii. 8sqq. (See Keil.) 
 
 GENESISSXLIS. 
 
 772 
 brethren shall praise: thy hand. shall 
 be in the neck of thine enemies; thy 
 father’s children shall bow down be- 
 fore thee. | 
 
 g Judah zs a lion’s whelp: from 
 the prey, my son, thou art gone up: 
 he stooped down, he couched as a 
 lion, and as an old lion; who shall 
 rouse him up? 
 
 10 The sceptre shall not depart 
 from Judah, nor a lawgiver from be- 
 
 8. Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren 
 shall praise} Judah, thou, thy brethren 
 shall praise thee. The word ‘‘thou” ts 
 emphatic, probably, like ‘‘ Judah,” in the voca- 
 tive, not, as some would render it, ‘* Thou art 
 Judah,” which is far tamer. ‘The reference is 
 to the meaning of the name. Leah said, ‘*‘ Now 
 will I praise the Lord, therefore she called his 
 name Judah” (ch. xxix. 35). Judah, not- 
 withstanding the sad history of him and his 
 house in ch. xxxviii., shewed on the whole 
 more nobleness than any of the elder sons of 
 Jacob. He and Reuben were the only two 
 who desired to save the life of Joseph (ch. 
 XXXvii. 22, 26); and his conduct before Jo- 
 seph in Egypt is truly noble and touching (see 
 ch. xliv. 18—34). Hence, when Reuben is 
 deprived of his birthright for incest, Simeon 
 and Levi for manslaughter, Judah, who is 
 next in age, naturally and rightly succeeds 
 to it. 
 
 thy hand shall be in the neck of thine ene 
 mies; thy father’s children shall bow down 
 before thee] He was to be victorious in war, 
 and the leading tribe in Israel; the former 
 promise being signally fulfilled in the victories 
 of David and Solomon, the latter in the eleva- 
 tion of Judah to be the royal tribe; but both 
 most fully in the victory and royalty of Da- 
 vid’s Son and David’s Lord. 
 
 9. Judah is a lion’s whelp: from the prey, 
 my son, thou art gone up| Judah is com- 
 pared to the most royal and the most powerful 
 of beasts. ‘The image is from the lion retiring 
 to the mountains after having devoured his 
 prey: not probably, as Gesenius and others, 
 ‘‘thou hast grown up from feeding upon the 
 
 prey.” 
 
 as an old lion] As a lioness (Bochart, 
 ¢Hieroz.’ 1. p. 719; Ges. ‘Thes!” p. 738). 
 The standard of Judah was a hon, very pro- 
 bably derived from these words of Jacob. 
 
 10. The sceptre shall not depart from 
 Judah, &c.| Render 
 Asceptre shall not depart from Judah 
 
 Nor alawgiverfrom between his feet, 
 Until that Shiloh come, 
 
 And to him shall be the obedience of 
 
 the peoples. 
 PQ 
 
 227 
 
228 
 
 tween his feet, until Shiloh come; 
 and unto him shail the gathering of 
 the people de. 
 
 11 Binding his foal unto the vine, 
 and his ass’s colt unto the choice vine ; 
 
 A remarkable prophecy of the Messiah, and 
 so acknowledged by all Jewish, as well as 
 Christian, antiquity. The meaning of the 
 verse appears to be ‘‘ The Sceptre (either of 
 royal, or perhaps only of tribal, authority) 
 shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver 
 (senator or scribe) from before him, until Shi- 
 loh (z.e. either ‘the Prince of peace,’ or ‘he 
 whose right it is’) shall come, and to him 
 shall the nations be obedient.” There are 
 some obscure expressions, but we may confi- 
 dently hold that the above paraphrase conveys 
 the true sense of the passage. 
 
 1. The word sceptre, originally denoting a 
 staff of wood, a strong rod taken from a tree 
 and peeled as a wand, is used (1) for ‘‘the rod 
 of correction, (2) for ‘‘the staff of a shep- 
 herd,” (3) for ‘‘the sceptre of royalty” (as 
 Ps. xlv..7; cp. Hom. ‘I.’ 11. 46, 101), (4) 
 for ‘‘a tribe,” which may be because the 
 sceptre denoted tribal as well as regal au- 
 thority, or because tribes were considered as 
 twigs or branches from a central stem. (See 
 Ges. p. 1353.) It is probable that the sceptre 
 in Balaam’s prophecy (Num. xxiv. 17) has a 
 reference to these words of Jacob. 
 
 2. ‘A lawgiver,” so, more or less, all the 
 Ancient Versions. ‘The LXX. and Vulg. ren- 
 der ‘‘a leader,” the Targums paraphrasing by 
 ** scribe or interpreter of the law.” The word 
 certainly means ‘‘a lawgiver” in Deut. xxxiii. 
 21; Isa. xxxili. 22; and all ancient interpreta- 
 tion was in favour of understanding it of a 
 person. The R. Lipmann, however, proposed 
 the sense of ‘‘a rod or staff” answering to 
 ‘*the sceptre” in the former clause, in which 
 he has been followed by eminent critics, such 
 as Gesenius, Tuch, Knobel, who think that 
 this sense is more pertinent here, and in Num. 
 &x1. 18; Ps. lx. 7 (see Heidegger, Vol. 11. p. 
 738; Ges. p. 514); but it requires proof that 
 the word, naturally signifying ‘ lawgiver,” 
 sometimes undoubtedly meaning ‘lawgiver,” 
 and always so rendered in the Versions, can 
 mean lawgiver’s staff or sceptre. 
 
 3. ‘‘From between his feet” is rendered 
 by the Versions, and generally by commenta- 
 tors Ae among his posterity. (See Ges. 
 Pp. 204. 
 
 4. ‘Until Shiloh come.” For fuller con- 
 sideration of the name ‘‘Shiloh,” see Note A at 
 the end of the Chapter. The only two admis- 
 sible interpretations are that the word is (1) 
 a proper name, meaning ‘‘the Peace-maker,” 
 ‘“‘the Prince of peace,” or, (2) according to 
 the almost unanimous consent of the Versions 
 and ‘Targums, ‘‘ He, whose right it is.” All 
 
 GHN ES IS ec nN 
 
 [v. 1I-—-13. 
 
 he washed his garments in wine, 
 and his clothes in the blood of grapes: 
 12 His eyes shall be red with wine, 
 and his teeth white with milk. 
 13 4 Zebulun shall dwell at the 
 
 the Targums add the name of Messiah, and 
 all the more ancient Jews held it to be an 
 undoubted prophecy of Messiah. 
 
 5. ‘¢Unto him shall the gathering of the 
 people be.” Rather, ‘‘Unto him shall be the 
 obedience of the nations.” ‘The word for obe- 
 dience occurs only once besides, in Prov. xxx. 
 17; but, if the reading be correct, there is little 
 doubt of its significance. (See Ges. pp. 620, 
 1200; Heidegger, ‘Tom. II. p. 748.) 
 
 As regards the fulfilment of this prophecy, 
 it is undoubted that the tribal authority and 
 the highest place in the nation continued with 
 Judah until the destruction of Jerusalem. It 
 is true that after the Babylonish Captivity the 
 royalty was not in the house of Judah; but 
 the prophecy is not express as to the possession 
 of absolute royalty. Israel never ceased to be 
 a nation, Judah never ceased to be a tribe with 
 at least a tribal sceptre and lawgivers, or ex- 
 positors of the law, Sanhedrim or Senators, and 
 with a general pre-eminence in the land, nor 
 was there a foreign ruler of the people, till at 
 least the time of Herod the Great, just before 
 the birth of the Saviour; and even the Herods, 
 though of Idumzan extraction, were consi- 
 dered as exercising a native sovereignty in 
 Judah, which did not quite pass away till a 
 Roman procurator was sent thither after the 
 reign of Archelaus, the son of Herod the 
 Great: and at that very time the Shiloh came, 
 the Prince of peace, to whom of right the 
 kingdom belonged. (On the meaning of the 
 name Shiloh, see Note A at the end of the 
 Chapter.) 
 
 11. Binding his foal unto the vine, &c.] 
 Many think that the patriarch, having spoken 
 of the endurance of the reign of Judah till the 
 coming of Christ, returns to speak of Judah’s 
 temporal prosperity during all that period; 
 but the Targums of Jerusalem and Pseudo- 
 Jonathan refer this verse to the Messiah. So 
 also several Christian fathers (e.g. Chrysos- 
 tom, in loc., Theodoret, ‘Qu. in Gen.’); in- 
 terpreting the vine of the Jewish people, and 
 the wild ass of the gentile converts brought 
 into the vineyard of the Church. The wash- 
 ing of the garments in wine they consider an 
 allusion to Christ as the true vine (John xv. 1), 
 to His treading ‘‘the winepress alone” (Isa. 
 Ixiil. r—3), and empurpling His garments with 
 His own Blood. (See Heidegger, 11. pp. 752, 
 sqq-) 
 
 12. His eyes shall be red with wine,] &c. 
 Or perhaps (as the LXX., Vulg., Targg. Je- 
 rus., and Pseudo-Jon.), ‘‘ His eyes shall be 
 
GENESIS, XLIX. 
 
 haven of the sea; and he shall be 
 for an haven of ships; and his border 
 shall be unto Zidon. 
 
 14 4 Issachar is a strong ass couch- 
 ing down between two burdens: 
 
 14-191] 229 
 16 { Dan shall judge his people, 
 as one of the tribes of Israel. 
 17 Dan shall be a serpent by the 
 way, ‘an adder in the path, that biteth t Heb. 
 the horse heels, so that his rider shall Seago 
 
 15 And he saw that rest was good, 
 and the land that zt was pleasant; 
 and bowed his shoulder to bear, and 
 became a servant unto tribute. 
 
 redder than wine, and His teeth whiter than 
 milk.” ‘This is generally supposed to refer to 
 the land flowing with milk and honey, and 
 abounding in vineyards; but the fathers ap- 
 plied it to the Messiah’s kingdom in the same 
 manner with the last verse, e.g. ‘‘’That His 
 eyes shine as with wine know all those mem- 
 bers of His Body mystical, to whom it is 
 given with a sort of sacred inebriation of mind, 
 alienated from the fleeting things of time, to 
 behold the eternal brightness of wisdom.” 
 (Augustin. ‘C. Faust.’ x1I. 42, Tom. VIII. 
 p- 24). 
 
 13. Zebulun shall dwell at the haven of 
 the sea| ‘‘Zebulun shall dwell on the shore of 
 the sea, and he shall be for a shore of ships,” 
 (i.e. suited for ships to land on), ‘‘and his 
 border” (or farthest extremity) ‘‘shall be by 
 Zidon.” As far as we know of the limits of 
 Zebulun, after the occupation of Canaan, it 
 reached from the sea of Gennesareth to Mount 
 Carmel, and so nearly to the Mediterranean. 
 It did not reach to the city of Zidon, but its 
 most western point reaching to Mount Car- 
 mel brought it into close proximity to Zido- 
 nia, or the territory of Tyre and Sidon. ‘The 
 language here used, though in all material 
 points fulfilled in the subsequent history, is 
 just what would not have been written by a 
 forger in after times. Zebulun had not pro- 
 perly a maritime territory; yet its possessions 
 reached very nearly to both seas. It was far 
 from the city of Zidon; and yet, as approxi- 
 mating very closely to the land of the Syrians, 
 might well be said to have its border by or to- 
 wards Zidon. ‘Tyre probably was not built 
 at this time, and therefore is not named in the 
 prophecy. 
 
 14. Issachar is a strong ass couching 
 down between two burdens| Probably ‘‘Issa- 
 char is a strong-boned ass, couching down 
 between the cattle pens,” or ‘‘ sheepfolds.” 
 The last word occurs only here and in Judg. 
 v. 16, where it is rendered sheepfolds (see 
 Reediger in Ges. ‘’Thes.’ p. 1470). The 
 prediction all points to the habits of an in- 
 dolent agricultural people, and to what is 
 likely to accompany such habits, an endur- 
 ance of oppression in preference to a war of 
 independence, 
 
 16. Dan shall judge his people, &c.] 
 
 fall backward. 
 18 I have waited for thy salvation, 
 
 O Lorp. 
 
 19 4 Gad, a troop shall overcome 
 
 A paronomasia on Dan (i.e. a judge). ‘The 
 words may mean that, though he was only a 
 son of Bilhah, he shall yet have tribal autho- 
 rity in his own people. ‘The word translated 
 ‘‘ tribe” is the same as that translated ‘‘ scep- 
 tre” inv. ro. Onkelos and others after him 
 suppose the allusion to be to the judgeship of 
 Samson, who was of the tribe of Dan (Judg. 
 XV. 20). 
 
 17. Dan shall be a serpent by the way, 
 an adder in the path| The word for adder, 
 Shephiphon, is translated by the Vulg. cerastes 
 the horned snake, the coluber cerastes of Lin- 
 nzus, a small snake about 14 inches long and 
 one inch thick, lurking in the sand and by the 
 way side, very poisonous and dangerous. 
 (Bochart, * Hieroz.’ Pt. ii. ‘Lib. 111. ¢.°x2,) 
 The people of Dan in Judges xviii. 27, shewed 
 the kind of subtlety here ascribed to them. 
 Perhaps the local position of the tribe is 
 alluded to. It was placed originally on the 
 outskirts of the royal tribe of Judah, and 
 might in times of war have to watch stealthily 
 for the enemy and fall on him by subtlety as 
 he was approaching. The comparison of 
 Dan to a serpent lying in wait and biting the 
 heel seems to imply some condemnation. 
 It is certainly observable that the first intro- 
 duction of Idolatry in Israel is ascribed to the 
 tribe of Dan (Judg. xviii.), and that in the 
 numbering of the tribes in Rev. vii., the name 
 of Dan is omitted. From these or other 
 causes many of the fathers were led to believe 
 that antichrist should spring from the tribe of 
 Dan (Iren. v. 30, 32; Ambros. ‘De Bene- 
 dict. Patriarch.’ c. 7; Augustin. ‘In Josuam,’ 
 Quest. 22; Theodoret, ‘In Genes,’ Quest. 
 tog; Prosper, ‘De Promiss. et Predict.’ p. 4; 
 Gregorius, ‘Moral.’ c. 18, &c.). 
 
 18. I have waited for thy salvation, O 
 Lorp] ‘This ejaculation immediately follow- 
 ing the blessing on Dan is very remarkable, 
 but not easy to interpret. The Targg. Jerus. 
 and Pseudo-Jonath. (and according to the 
 Complutensian Polyglot Onkelos also, though 
 the passage is probably spurious) paraphrase 
 the words by saying that Jacob looked not 
 for temporal redemption, such as_ that 
 wrought by Gideon or Samson, but for the 
 eternal redemption promised by Messiah, Is 
 it not possible, that Jacob, having been moved 
 
t Heb. 
 
 him: but he shall overcome at the 
 last. 
 
 20 | Out of Asher his bread shall 
 be fat, and he shall yield royal dainties. 
 
 21 { Naphtali zs a hind let loose: 
 he giveth goodly words. 
 
 22 4 Joseph is a fruitful bough, 
 even a fruitful bough by a well; whose 
 
 daughters. ‘ branches run over the wall: 
 
 GHINIE,S BS rexel: 
 
 [v. 20—25, 
 
 23 The archers have sorely grieved 
 him, and shot at him, and hated 
 him: 
 
 24 But his bow abode in strength, 
 and the arms of his hands were made 
 strong by the hands of the mighty 
 God of Jacob; (from thence zs the 
 shepherd, the stone of Israel :) 3 
 
 2.5 Even by the God of thy father, 
 
 by the Spirit of God to speak of the serpent 
 biting the heel, may have had his thoughts 
 called back to the primal promise made to 
 Eve, the Protevangelium, where the sentence 
 that the serpent should bruise the heel was 
 succeeded by the promise that the serpent’s 
 head should be crushed by the coming Seed? 
 This combination of thoughts may easily have 
 elicited the exclamation of this verse. 
 
 19. Gad, a troop shall overcome him: 
 but he shall overcome at the last] Perhaps 
 ‘¢ Gad, troops shall press on him, but he 
 shall press upon their rear’? (so Gesen. p. 
 271; Ros., Schum.); the allusion being to the 
 Arab tribes in the neighbourhood of Gad, 
 who would invade him, and then retire, Gad 
 following them and harassing their retreat. 
 Every word but two in the verse is some 
 form of the same root, there being a play 
 of words on the name Gad and Gedud, i.e. a 
 troop; we might express it, ‘‘Gad, troops 
 shall troop against him, but he shall troop on 
 their retreat.”” (See on ch. xxx. 11.) 
 
 20. Out of Asher his bread shall be fat, 
 and he shall yield royal dainties| ‘The trans- 
 lation may be a little doubtful; but the sense 
 is probably that expressed by the Authorised 
 Version. ‘The allusion is to the fertility of 
 the territory of Asher extending from Mount 
 Carmel along the coast of Sidonia nearly to 
 Mount Lebanon. It was specially rich in 
 corn, wine and oil (Heidegger), containing 
 some of the most fertile land in Palestine 
 (Stanley, ‘S. and P.’ p. 265). 
 
 / 21. Naphtali is a hind let loose: he giv- 
 eth goodly words| ‘The ‘Targg. Pseudo- Jon. 
 and Jerus. explain this that ‘‘ Naphtali is a 
 swift messenger, like a hind that runneth on 
 the mountains, bringing good tidings.”’ So 
 virtually the Syr. and Sam. Versions. ‘The 
 allusion is obscure, as we know so little of 
 the history of Naphtali The ‘Targums 
 above cited say that Naphtali first declared 
 to Jacob that Joseph was yet alive. As the 
 tribe of Naphtali occupied part of that re- 
 gion which afterwards became Galilee, some 
 have supposed that there was contained in 
 these words a prophecy of the Apostles (in 
 Hebrew Sheluchim, the same word with She= 
 lucha here rendered ‘let loose”), who were 
 Galileans and of whom it was said, ‘*‘ How 
 
 beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of 
 him that bringeth good tidings.” 
 
 Bochart, after whom Michaelis, Schulz, 
 Dathe, Ewald and others, follow the LXX. 
 altering the vowel points, and render, ‘‘ Naph- 
 tali is a spreading tree, which puts forth 
 goodly branches.” 
 
 22. Joseph is a fruitful bough]  Per- 
 haps ‘ Joseph is the son,” or branch, “of a 
 fruitful tree, the son of a fruitful tree by a 
 well, as for the branches” (lit. the daughters) 
 ‘‘each one of them runneth over the wall” 
 (see Ges. 218, 220). The construction is 
 difficult and the difference of translations very 
 considerable; but so, or nearly so, Gesen., 
 Tuch, Knobel, Delitzsch, &c. The pro- 
 phecy probably refers to the general pros- 
 perity of the house of Joseph. ‘The fruitful 
 tree is by some supposed to be Rachel. The 
 luxuriance of the tendrils running over the 
 wall may point to Joseph’s growing into two 
 tribes, whilst none of his brethren formed 
 more than one: so Onkelos. 
 
 23. The archers have sorely grievea 
 him| ‘Though the Targums and others have 
 referred this to Joseph’s trials in Egypt, the 
 prophetic character of the whole chapter 
 shows that they point rather to the future 
 wars of his tribes and the strength which he 
 received from the hands of the mighty God 
 of Jacob. 
 
 24. from thence is the shepherd, the stone 
 of Israel] ‘‘ From thence,” referring to ‘‘ the 
 mighty one of Jacob” in the last clause. Some 
 understand here that Joseph, having been 
 defended from the malice of his enemies, 
 was raised up by God to be a Shepherd or 
 Guardian both to the Egyptians and to his 
 own family, and a stone or rock of support 
 to the house of Israel. Others see in this 
 a prophecy of Joshua, the great captain 
 of his people, who came of the tribe of 
 Ephraim, and led the Israelites to the pro- 
 mised land. Others again have thought that, 
 when Jacob was speaking of the sufferings 
 and subsequent exaltation of his son Joseph, 
 his visions were directed forward to that 
 greater Son, of whom Joseph was a type, 
 whom the archers vexed, but who was yic- 
 torious over all enemies, and that of Him he 
 says ‘‘ From Gop cometh the Shepherd, the 
 
v. 26—33. | 
 
 who shall help thee; and by the Al- 
 mighty, who shall bless thee with 
 blessings of heaven above, blessings 
 of the deep that lieth under, blessings 
 of the breasts, and of the womb: 
 
 26 The blessings of thy father have 
 prevailed above the blessings of my 
 progenitors unto the utmost bound 
 of the everlasting hills: they shall be 
 
 on the head of Joseph, and on the: 
 
 crown of the head of him that was 
 separate from his brethren. 
 
 27 4 Benjamin shall ravin as a 
 wolf: in the morning he shall devour 
 the prey, and at night he shall divide 
 the spoil. 
 
 28 { All these are the twelve tribes 
 of Israel: and this zs zt that their father 
 spake unto them, and blessed them; 
 every one according to his blessing he 
 blessed them. 
 
 29 And he charged them, and said 
 
 Rock of Israel.” As both Joseph and Joshua 
 were eminent shadows and forerunners of the 
 Saviour, it is quite possible that all these 
 senses, more or less, belong to the words, 
 though perhaps with special reference to the 
 last. ‘The translation advocated by many 
 recent commentators, ‘‘ From thence—from 
 the Shepherd —the Rock of Israel” is against 
 the original and the Versions. 
 
 25. Even by the God of thy father, who 
 shall help thee, &c.| Rather ‘‘ From the God 
 of thy father and He shall help thee, and with 
 (the aid of) the Almighty, even He shall bless 
 thee,” 
 
 26. The blessings of thy father have 
 prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors 
 unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills] 
 If this be the right rendering of a very obscure 
 passage in the original, the meaning obviously 
 is, that the blessings of Jacob on the head of 
 Joseph and his offspring are greater than those 
 which Abraham had pronounced on Isaac 
 and Isaac on Jacob, and that they should 
 last as long as the everlasting hills. ‘This is 
 more or less the interpretation of all the 
 Jewish commentators following the ‘Targums 
 and the Vulg. The LXX (with which 
 agrees the reading of the Samaritan Penta- 
 teuch) has a rendering which is adopted by 
 Michaelis, Dathe, Vater, uch, Winer, 
 Maurer, Schumann, Knobel, and Gesen. 
 (see Ges. pp. 38, 391), ‘The blessings of thy 
 father prevail over the blessings of the eternal 
 mountains, even the glory of the everlasting 
 hills.” By this the parallelism of the two 
 
 GEN ES ISe eS aTxX: 
 
 unto them, I am to be gathered unto 
 
 my people: ’bury me with my fathers ¢ chap. 47. 
 
 in the cave that zs in the field of Eph- >” 
 ron the Hittite, 
 
 30 In the cave that #s in the field of 
 Machpelah, which 7s before Mamre, 
 
 in the land of Canaan, “which Abra- ¢ chap. 23. 
 
 ham bought with the field of Eph-** 
 ron the Hittite for a possession of a 
 buryingplace.. 
 
 31 There they buried Abraham 
 and Sarah his wife; there they buried 
 Isaac and Rebekah his wife; and there 
 I buried Leah. 
 
 32 The purchase of the field and 
 of the cave that zs therein was from 
 the children of Heth. 
 
 33 And when Jacob had made an 
 end of commanding his sons, he ga- 
 thered up his feet into the bed, and 
 yielded up the ghost, and was gather- 
 ed unto his people. 
 
 clauses is preserved, and the violence done to 
 the two words translated in Authorised Ver- 
 sion ‘‘progenitors” and ‘utmost bounds” 
 is avoided. 
 
 separate from his brethren] So Onkelos. 
 The Vulg. and Saad. have ‘‘the Nazarite 
 among his brethren.” Either of these transla 
 tions would allude to the separation of Joseph 
 from his family, first by his captivity and 
 afterwards by his elevation. ‘The word for 
 ‘¢separate” means ‘‘ene set apart,” ‘‘ conse- 
 crated,” especially used of a Nazarite like 
 Samson (Judg. xili., xvi. 17), and of the Naza- 
 rite under the law (Num. vi. 2). It is possi- 
 ble that this consecration may apply also to 
 princes who are separated to higher rank in 
 dignity, just as the word zezer, ‘‘ consecra- 
 tion,” signifies a royal or high-priestly diadem. 
 Accordingly, the LXX., Syr., Targg. Jerus., 
 Pseudo- Jon. and many recent interpreters, ren- 
 der ‘‘a prince or leader of his brethren” (see 
 Ges. p. 871). 
 
 27. Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf, 
 &c.] ‘The reference is, no doubt, to the war- 
 like character of the tribe of Benjamin. Ex- 
 amples of this may be seen Judg. v. 14, Xx. 
 16; 1 Chron, vil. 7, xil..17; 2 Chron. xiv. 8, 
 xvii. 17. Also Ehud the Judge (Judg. iii. r5) 
 and Saul the king, with his son Jonathan, were 
 Benjamites. ‘The fathers (Tertul., Ambrose, 
 August., Jerom.) think that there is a refer- 
 ence also to St Paul, who before his conver= 
 sion devastated the Church and in later life 
 brought home the spoils of the Gentiles, 
 
 231 
 
23 
 
 NOLES AlGn CHAP. XLII -Y¥. 10. 
 
 ‘¢He who shall be sent.” 2. 
 ‘“'The Peace-Maker.” 5. 
 Messianic, by consent of Jewish and Christian 
 
 i. Different renderings of word. 1. 
 come to Shiloh.” 4. 
 of renderings, either 4 or 5. ill. 
 antiquity. iv. Answer to objections. 
 
 Shiloh. A word of acknowledged difficulty. 
 
 1. The Vulgate renders ‘‘ He, who shall be 
 sent” (comp. Shiloah, Isai. viii. 6; John ix. 7 
 —11). This would correspond with a title of 
 the Messiah, ‘‘ He that should come” (Matt. xi. 
 3). Such a translation is unsupported from 
 other sources and rests on a different reading 
 of the original, the letter M (cheth) being sub- 
 stituted for 7 (he) of the received text. 
 
 2. The Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan and 
 some rabbins render ‘‘ his son.” So Kimchi, 
 Pagninus, Calvin and others: but it requires 
 proof that the word shi/, ‘‘a son,” has any 
 existence in Hebrew. 
 
 3. ‘The Rabbi Lipmann, in his book called 
 ‘¢Nizzachon,” suggests that it was the name of 
 the city Shiloh, and that we should render 
 ‘¢until he (Judah) shall come to Shiloh.” A 
 similar construction occurs 1 S. iv. 12 (he 
 ‘came to Shiloh”), and it is said that Judah, 
 in the march to the encampments in the wil- 
 derness, always took the first place (Num. ii. 
 3—9, X. 14), but that, when the Israelites came 
 to Shiloh, they pitched the tabernacle there 
 (Josh. xviii. r—10), and, the other tribes de- 
 parting from Judah, his principality closed. 
 
 It seems fatal to this theory, that every 
 ancient Version, paraphrase and commentator 
 make Shiloh, not the objective case after the 
 verb, but the subject or nominative case before 
 the verb. Moreover, whether it were a pro- 
 phecy by Jacob, or, as many who adopt this 
 theory will have it, a forgery of after date, 
 nothing could be less pertinent than the sense 
 to be elicited from the words, ‘till he come to 
 Shiloh.” Probably the town of Shiloh did 
 not exist in Jacob’s time, and Judah neither 
 lost nor acquired the pre-eminence at Shiloh: 
 He was not markedly the leader in the wilder- 
 ness, for the people were led by Moses and 
 Aaron; nor did he cease to have whatever 
 pre-eminence he may have had when they 
 came to Shiloh. ‘This has induced some to 
 vary the words, by translating, ‘‘when he 
 comes to Shiloh,” a translation utterly inad- 
 missible; but it will give no help to the solu- 
 tion of the passage, for Judah did not acquire 
 any fresh authority at Shiloh. It was the 
 place of the rest of the tabernacle and there- 
 fore perhaps was named Shiloh, ‘‘ Rest: but 
 it was no turning point in the history of 
 Judah. Notwithstanding therefore the autho- 
 rity of ‘Teller, Eichhorn, Bleek, Hitzig, ‘Tuch, 
 Ewald, Delitzsch, Kalisch, &c., we may pro- 
 nounce with Hofmann, that the rendering is 
 utterly impossible. 
 
 GENESIS. “X1iX, 
 
 SHILOH. 
 
 ‘Hig Son. eaey 
 ‘¢He, whose right it is.” ii. 
 
 “Until he 
 Choice 
 
 4. Far more probable is the rendering 
 which makes Shiloh a proper name, and the 
 subject of the verb, signifying ‘‘ Peace,” or 
 rather, ‘‘the Peace-maker,” the ‘‘ Prince of 
 peace.” So, with slight variations, Luther, 
 Vater, Gesenius, Rosenmiiller, Hengstenberg, 
 Knobel, Keil and others of the highest authori- 
 ty. The title is one most appropriate to Messiah 
 (see Isai. ix. 6). The word is legitimately 
 formed from the verb Sha/ah, to rest, to be at 
 peace; and if the received reading be the true 
 reading, there need be little doubt that this is 
 its meaning. It has been thought by some 
 that Solomon received his name Shelomo, the 
 ‘¢ peaceful,” with an express reference to this 
 prophecy of Shiloh, and it may be said that in 
 Solomon was a partial fulfilment of the pro- 
 mise. Solomon was very markedly a type of 
 the Messiah, himself the son of David, whose 
 dominion was from sea to sea, who established 
 a reign of peace in the land and who built the 
 temple of the Lord; but Solomon was not 
 the true Shiloh, any more than he was the 
 true ‘‘Son of David.” 
 
 5. The authority of the Ancient Versions 
 is all but overwhelming in favour of the 
 sense, ‘‘ He, to whom it belongs,” or ‘‘ He, 
 whose right it is.” So, more or less, 
 LXX., Aq., Symm., Syr., Saad., Onk., 
 Targ. Jer., all, in fact, except Vulg. and 
 Pseudo- Jonathan. 
 
 The objections to this are: 
 
 (1) That if the letter yod (expressed by the 
 z in Shiloh) be genuine, the translation is in- 
 admissible: but it is replied that very many 
 Hebrew MSS. and all Samaritan MSS. are 
 without the yod, and that the evidence is much 
 in favour of the belief that the yod did not 
 appear till the roth century (see Prof. Lee, ‘ Lex.’ 
 in voc.). It may be added that, as the reading 
 without the yod is the harder and apparently 
 the less probable, the copyists were more like- 
 ly to have inserted it by mistake than to have 
 omitted it by mistake. 
 
 (2) It is said, that by this reading so inter- 
 preted, a form is introduced unknown to the 
 Pentateuch, Aramzan and of later date. To 
 this it is replied, that the form occurs in the 
 Song of Deborah (Judg. v. 7), which is very 
 ancient; that Aramean forms were either very 
 ancient or decidedly modern, to be met with 
 in Hebrew when the patriarchs were in con- 
 tact with the Chaldzans (and Jacob had been 
 forty years in Mesopotamia), or not again 
 till the Jews were in captivity at Babylon. 
 An Aramaism or Chaldaism.therefore was na- 
 
Wet; 2. 
 
 tural in the mouth of Jacob, though not in 
 the mouth of David or Solomon. 
 
 This rendering of the Vss. is supported by 
 the early Christian writers, as Justin M. 
 (‘Dial.’ § 120) and many others. It is thought 
 that Ezekiel (xxi. 27) actually quotes the 
 words, ‘* Until he come whose right it is,” 
 expanding them a little, and St Paul (in Gal. 
 iii. x9) is supposed to refer to them. 
 
 On the whole, rejecting confidently the 
 _ senses I, 2, 3, we may Safely adopt either 4 or 
 53 4, if the reading be correct; 5, if the read- 
 ing without the yod be accepted. 
 
 All Jewish antiquity referred the prophecy to 
 Messiah. ‘Thus the Targum of Onkelos has 
 ‘¢until the Messiah come, whose is the king- 
 dom;” the Jerusalem Targum, ‘until the time 
 that the king Messiah shall come, whose is the 
 kingdom.” ‘The’ Targum of Pseudo- Jonathan, 
 ‘till the king the Messiah shall come, the 
 youngest of his sons.” So the Babylonian 
 Talmud (‘Sanhedrim,’ cap. I. fol. 982), 
 “What is Messiah’s name? His name is 
 Shiloh, for it is written, Until Shiloh come.” 
 So likewise the Bereshith Rabba, Kimchi, 
 Aben-ezra, Rashi, and other ancient Rabbins. 
 The more modern Jews, pressed by the argu- 
 ment, that the time appointed must have 
 passed, refer to David, Saul, Nebuchadnezzar 
 and others (see Schoettgen, ‘Hor. Heb.’ p. 1264). 
 There can be no doubt that this prophecy was 
 one important link in the long chain of predic- 
 tions which produced that general expectation 
 of a Messiah universally prevalent in Judza at 
 the period of the Christian era, and which 
 Suetonius, in the well-known passage in his 
 life of Vespasian, tells us had long and 
 constantly pervaded the whole of the East. 
 With the Jewish interpreters agreed the whole 
 body of Christian fathers, e.g. Justin M. 
 * Apol.’ 1. §§ 32, 54; ‘ Dial.’ §§ 52, 20; Iren. 
 IV. 23; Origen, ‘C. Cels.’ 1. p. 41, ‘ Hom.’ 
 in Gen. 17; Cyprian, ‘ C. Jud.’ 1. 20; Cyril. 
 Pee at, xii. Euseb..°H., FE.’ 1. 6; 
 Chrys. ‘Hom. 67, in Gen.’; Augustine, ‘De 
 Civ. D.’ xvi.41; Theodoret, ‘ Quest. in Gen.’ 
 x10; Hieron. ‘ Quest. in Gen.’, &c. 
 
 The only arguments of any weight against 
 the Messianic character of the prophecy, ex- 
 cept of course a denial that prophecy is possi- 
 ble at all, seem to be the following. 
 
 CHAPTER L. 
 
 1 The mourning for Facob. 4 Foseph getteth 
 leave of Pharaoh to go to bury him. 7 The 
 funeral. 15 Foseph comforteth his brethren, 
 who craved his pardon. 22 His age. 23 
 He seeth the third generation of his sons. 
 24 He prophesieth unto his brethren of their 
 
 Cuar. L. 2. his servants the physi- 
 cians| Herod. (11. 84) tells us, that in Egypt 
 
 GONE STS) rley, 
 
 23 
 
 1. The patriarchal age had no anticipation 
 of a personal Messiah, though there may have 
 been some dim hope of a future deliverance. 
 This is simply a gratuitous assertion. Ad- 
 mitting even that the promise to Adam may 
 have been vaguely understood, we cannot tell 
 how much the rite of sacrifice, the prophecies 
 of men like Enoch and Noah, and the pro- 
 mises to Abraham and Isaac, had taught the 
 faith of the fathers. ‘There is the highest of 
 all authority for saying that ‘‘ Abraham re- 
 joiced to see the day of Christ; he saw it, and 
 was glad” (Joh. viii. 56). It was not indeed 
 to be expected, that much beyond general in- 
 timations should be given in very early times, 
 the light gradually increasing as the Sun-rise 
 was drawing near: but there seems no more 
 likely time for a special teaching on this vital 
 point than the time of Jacob’s death. He 
 was the last of the three patriarchs to whom 
 the promises were given. He was leaving his 
 family in a foreign land, where they were to 
 pass some generations surrounded by idolatry 
 and error. He was foretelling their future 
 fortunes on their promised return to Canaan. 
 What more natural than that he should be 
 moved to point their hopes yet farther torward 
 to that, of which the deliverance from Egypt 
 was to be an emblem and type? 
 
 2. ‘The New Testament does not cite this 
 as a prediction of Christ. 
 
 Bishop Patrick has well observed, that the 
 fulfilment of the prophecy was not till the 
 destruction of Jerusalem, when not onlv the 
 Sceptre of Royalty, but even the tribal autho- 
 rity, and the Sanhedrim or council of elders 
 (‘‘the lawgiver”) wholly passed from Judah. 
 Then, and not till then, had the foretold for- 
 tunes of Judah’s house been worked out. 
 The sceptre and the lawgiver had departed, 
 and ‘‘ He, whose right it was,” had taken the 
 kingdom. ‘The ‘‘ Prince of peace” had come, 
 and nations were coming into His obedience. 
 But it would have been no argument to the 
 Jew to cite this prophecy, whilst the Jewish 
 nation was still standing and still struggling 
 for its freedom, still possessing at least a 
 shadow of royal authority and judicial 
 power. ‘There is therefore abundant reason 
 why the New Testament should not refer 
 to it. 
 
 return. 25 He taketh an oath of them for 
 his bones. 26 He dieth, and is chested. 
 
 ND Joseph fell upon his father’s 
 face, and wept upon him, and 
 kissed him. 
 2, And Joseph commanded his ser- 
 vants the physicians to embalm his 
 
 all places were crowded with physicians for 
 every different kind of disease. ‘The physi- 
 
234 
 
 t Heb. 
 wept, 
 
 @ chap. 47. 
 
 29. 
 
 father: and the physicians embalmed 
 Israel. 
 
 3 And forty days were fulfilled for 
 him; for so are fulfilled the days of 
 those which are embalmed: and the 
 Egyptians ‘mourned for him three- 
 score and ten days. 
 
 4 And when the days of his mourn- 
 ing were past, Joseph spake unto the 
 house of Pharaoh, saying, If now I 
 have found grace in your eyes, speak, 
 I pray you, in the ears of Pharaoh, 
 saying, 
 
 5 *My father made me swear, say- 
 ing, Lo, I die: in my grave which 
 I have digged for me in the land 
 of Canaan, there shalt thou bury me. 
 Now therefore let me go up, I pray 
 thee, and bury my father, and I will 
 come again. 
 
 6 And Pharaoh said, Go up, and 
 bury thy father, according as he made 
 thee swear. 
 
 cians of Egypt were famous in other lands 
 also (Herod. II. 1, 129). It is not wonder- 
 ful therefore that Joseph, with all his state, 
 should have had several physicians attached to 
 his establishment. Physicians, however, were 
 not ordinarily employed to embalm, which 
 was the work of a special class of persons 
 (Herod. 11. 85; Diodor.I. 91); and the cus- 
 tom of embalming and the occupation of the 
 embalmer were probably anterior to Moses 
 and to Joseph. Very probably the physicians 
 embalmed Jacob because he was not an 
 Egyptian, and so could not be subjected to 
 the ordinary treatment of the Egyptians, or 
 embalmed by their embalmers. 
 
 8. And forty days were fulfilled for 
 him] ‘The account given by Diodorus (1. 91) 
 is that the embalming lasted more than 30 
 days, and that when a king died they mourned 
 for him 72 days. ‘This very nearly corre- 
 sponds with the number in this verse. ‘The 
 mourning of 70 days probably included the 
 40 days of embalming. Herodotus (iI. 86), 
 who describes at length three processes of em- 
 balming, seems to speak of a subsequent steep- 
 ing in natron (z.e. subcarbonate of soda) for 
 70 days. He probably expresses himself with 
 some inaccuracy, as both the account in 
 Genesis, which is very much earlier, and the 
 account in Diodorus which is later, give a 
 much shorter time for the whole embalming, 
 i.e. either 30 or 40 days, and seem to make 
 the whole mourning last but 70 days. It is 
 possible, however, to understand Herodotus 
 
 GENE STS) 73; 
 
 7 @ And Joseph went up to bury 
 his father: and with him went up all 
 the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of 
 his house, and all the elders of the 
 land of Egypt, 
 
 8 And all the house of Joseph, 
 and his brethren, and his father’s 
 house: only their little ones, and 
 their flocks, and their herds, they left 
 in the land of Goshen. 
 
 g And there went up with him 
 both chariots and horsemen: and it 
 was a very great company. 
 
 ro And they came to the threshing- 
 floor of Atad, which zs beyond Jordan, 
 and there they mourned with a great 
 and very sore lamentation: and he made 
 a mourning for his father seven days. 
 
 11 And when the inhabitants of 
 the land, the Canaanites, saw the 
 mourning in the floor of Atad, they 
 said, This 7s a grievous mourning to 
 the Egyptians: wherefore the name 
 
 as meaning the same as the Scriptural account 
 and that of Diodorus. His words are, 
 ‘‘ Having done this they embalm in natron, 
 covering it up for 70 days. Longer than this 
 it is not lawful to embalm.” (See Sir G. Wil- 
 kinson in Rawlinson, ‘ Herod.’ 11. 86; Heng- 
 stenb, ‘ Egypt,’ &c. p. 68.) 
 
 4. Joseph spake unto the house of Pha- 
 raoh| He probably did not go himself to 
 Pharaoh, because in mourning for his father 
 he had let his hair and beard grow long, which 
 was the custom in Egypt at the death of rela- 
 tions (Herod. 11. 36): and it would have been 
 disrespectful to go into the presence of Pha- 
 raoh without cutting the hair and shaving the 
 beard. (See on ch. xli, 14, and Hengstenb. 
 
 ‘Egypt,’ p. 71.) 
 
 7. with him went up all the servants of 
 Pharaoh| Such large funeral processions are 
 often seen on the Egyptian monuments (Ro- 
 sellini, 11. p. 3953 Hengstenb. p. 71; Wilkin- 
 son, ‘A. E.’ Vol. v. ch. xvi. and plates 
 there). 
 
 10. threshingfloor of Atad| Or ‘*Goren- 
 Atad,” or ‘‘ the threshingfloor of thorns.” 
 
 beyond Jordan] i.e. to the West of Jor- 
 dan. Moses wrote before the Israelites had 
 taken possession of the land of Israel, and 
 therefore whilst they were on the East of Jor- 
 dan. ‘This accords with what we hear of the 
 site of Goren-Atad and Abel-Mizraim; for 
 Jerome (‘Onom.’ s. v. Area-Atad) identi- 
 
 [v.3—11. 
 
That is, 
 
 v. 12+25.] 
 
 of it was called ! Abel-mizraim, which 
 
 OUTH- « 
 te ofthe 1S beyond Jordan. 
 
 igype 
 
 Hes. 
 
 Acts rp 
 6 . 
 
 chap, 23. 
 Se 
 
 Heb. 
 larged. 
 
 12 And his sons did unto him ac- 
 cording as he commanded them: 
 
 13 For “his sons carried him into 
 the land of Canaan, and buried him 
 in the cave of the field of Machpe- 
 lah, which Abraham “bought with 
 the field for a possession of a bury- 
 ingplace of Ephron the Hittite, be- 
 fore Mamre. 
 
 14 4 And Joseph returned into 
 Egypt, he, and his brethren, and all 
 that went up with him to bury 
 his father, after he had buried his 
 father. 
 
 15 4 And when Joseph’s brethren 
 saw that their father was dead, they 
 said, Joseph will peradventure hate 
 us, and will certainly requite us all 
 the evil which we did unto him. 
 
 16 And they ‘sent a messenger 
 unto Joseph, saying, Thy father did 
 command before he died, saying, 
 
 17 So shall ye say unto Joseph, 
 Forgive, I pray thee now, the tres- 
 pass of thy brethren, and their sin; 
 for they did unto thee evil: and now, 
 we pray thee, forgive the trespass of 
 the servants of the God of thy father. 
 And Joseph wept when they spake 
 unto him. 
 
 fies it with Beth-Hoglah, which lay between 
 the Jordan and Jericho, the ruins of which 
 are probably still to be seen (Rob. I. 5443 see 
 Smith’s ‘ Dict. of Bible,’ 1. p. 200.) 
 
 11. <Abel-mizraim] Means either ‘the 
 field of Egypt,” or ‘‘the mourning of Egypt,” 
 according to the vowel-points. ‘The violence 
 of the Egyptian lamentations is described by 
 Herodotus (iI. 85). See also Wilkinson, 
 Paes CHV 
 
 19. Am I in the place of God?] i.e. it 
 is God’s place to avenge, not mine. See Rom. 
 xii. Ig. 
 
 23. Were brought up upon Joseph's knees] 
 Lit. ‘* were born on Joseph’s knees.” Comp. 
 the phrase ch. xxx. 3. It seems as if they 
 were adopted by Joseph as his own children 
 from the time of their birth. 
 
 26. They embalmed him, and he was put in 
 a cofin) ‘The word for coffin is literally 
 ‘Cark” or ‘chest ;” a word used always of 
 a wooden chest, elsewhere almost exclusively 
 
 GUN TS] Sil) 235 
 
 18 And his brethren also went 
 and fell down before his face; and 
 they said, Behold, we de thy ser- 
 vants. 
 
 19 And Joseph said unto them, 
 
 “Fear not: for am I in the place of ¢chap. 4s. 
 ~ — et ee LOR pete a in no 
 
 God? j 
 
 20 But as for you, ye thought evil 
 against me; but God meant it unto 
 good, to bring to pass, as it is this 
 day, to save much people alive. 
 
 21 Now. therefore fear ye not: I 
 will nourish you, and your little ones. 
 
 And he comforted them, and spake 
 ‘kindly unto them. 
 
 22 4 And Joseph dwelt in Egypt, 72 “<7 
 he, and his father’s house: and Joseph 
 lived an hundred and ten years. 
 
 23 And Joseph saw Ephraim’s 
 children of the third generation: ¢ the «Numb. 
 children also of Machir the son of >” 
 Manasseh were ‘brought up upon Jo- ot 
 seph’s knees. 
 
 24 And Joseph said unto his bre- 
 thren, I die: and 7God will surely ‘Heb. x. 
 visit you, and bring you out of this ~~ 
 land unto the land which he sware 
 to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. 
 
 25 And * Joseph took an oath of ¢ Exod.13. 
 the children of Israel, saying, God 
 will surely visit you, and ye shall 
 carry up my bones from hence. 
 
 t Heb. 
 
 of ‘‘the ark of the covenant.” Herodotus, 
 after describing the embalming, says, ‘‘ The 
 relatives inclose the body in a wooden image 
 which they have made in the shape of a man. 
 Then fastening the case, they place it in a 
 sepulchral chamber, upright against the wall. 
 This is the most costly way of embalming the 
 dead” (11. 86). ‘The description is of that 
 which we commonly call a mummy-case. 
 Such coffins, made of wood, chiefly of syca- 
 more wood, were the commonest in Egypt; 
 and though some very rich people were buried 
 in basaltic coffins, yet, both from Herodotus’ 
 description above and from other sources, we 
 know that wooden coffins were frequent, 
 for great men, even for kings. ‘The coffin 
 of king Mycerinus, discovered A.D. 1837 in 
 the third Pyramid of Memphis, is of syca- 
 more wood. The command of Joseph and 
 the promise of the Israelites, that his bones 
 should be carried back into Canaan, were 
 reason enough for preferring a wooden to 
 a stone coffin. (See Hengstenb. ‘ Egypt,’ pp. 
 71, 72. Various coffins of wood, stone, and 
 
236 
 
 26 So Joseph died, dezmg an hun- 
 dred and ten years old: and they 
 
 earthenware are described and engraved in 
 Wilkinson’s ‘A. E.’ Vol. v. p. 479.) The 
 coffin was, no doubt, deposited in some se- 
 pulchral building (see Herod. above) and 
 guarded by his own immediate descendants 
 till the time of the Exodus, when it was car- 
 ried up out of Egypt and finally deposited in 
 Shechem (Josh. xxiv. 32). The faith of Jo- 
 seph (Heb, xi. 22) must have been a constant 
 
 GENESTS ab, 
 
 [v. 26. 
 
 embalmed him, and he was put in 
 a coffin in Egypt. 
 
 remembrance to his children and his people, 
 that Egypt was not to be their home. His 
 coffin laid up by them, ready to be carried 
 away according to his dying request whenever 
 God should restore them to the promised land, 
 would have taught them to keep apart from 
 Egypt and its idolatries, looking for a better 
 country, which God had promised to their 
 fathers. 
 
GORD Glo 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 PAGE PAGE 
 Divisions of the Book, § x . 237 Sinai shown by the author,§ 4  . 244 
 Mosaic Authorship, § 2 - 239 . Argument from the account of the 
 Miracles in Egypt, § 3 ; , WAI Tabernacle, § 5 . 247 
 Personal knowledge of the Peninsula of Chronology, § 6 . . 248 
 
 § I. HE Book of Exodus consists 
 of two distinct portions. The 
 former (cc. i—xix) gives a detailed ac- 
 count of the circumstances under which 
 the deliverance of the Israelites was ac- 
 complished. The second (cc. xx—xl) 
 describes the giving of the law, and the 
 institutions which completed the organi- 
 zation of the people as “a kingdom of 
 priests, and an holy nation,” c. xix. 6. 
 
 These two portions are unlike in 
 style and structure, as might be ex- 
 pected from the difference of their sub- 
 ject-matter: but their mutual bearings 
 and interdependence are evident, and 
 leave no doubt as to the substantial 
 unity of the book. ‘The historical por- 
 tion owes all its significance and interest 
 to the promulgation of God’s will in 
 the law. The institutions of the law 
 could not, humanly speaking, have been 
 established or permanently maintained 
 but for the deliverance which the his- 
 torical portion records. 
 
 The name Exodus, z¢ “the going 
 forth,” applies rather to the former por- 
 tion than to the whole book. It was 
 very naturally assigned to it by the 
 Alexandrian Jews, by whom the most 
 ancient translation was written. Like 
 their forefathers they were exiles in 
 Egypt, and looked forward to their de- 
 parture from that land as the first con- 
 dition of the accomplishment of their 
 
 hopes. The Hebrews of Palestine simply 
 designated the book by its first words 
 Elleh Shemoth, ze “these are the 
 names,” regarding it not as a separate 
 work, but as a section of the Pentateuch. 
 
 The narrative, indeed, is so closely 
 connected with that of Genesis as to 
 shew not only that it was written by 
 the same author, but that it formed 
 part of one general plan. Still it is a 
 distinct section; the first events which 
 it relates are separated from the last 
 chapter in Genesis by a considerable 
 interval, and it presents the people of 
 Israel under totally different circum- 
 stances. Its termination is marked with 
 equal distinctness, winding up with the 
 
 completion of the tabernacle. 
 
 The book is divided into many smaller 
 sections; each of which has the marks 
 which throughout the Pentateuch indi- 
 cate a subdivision. They are of different 
 lengths, and were probably written on 
 separate parchments or papyri, the long- 
 est not exceeding the dimensions of con- 
 temporary documents in Egypt’, They 
 
 1 A single page of Egyptian papyrus contains 
 very frequently as much subject-matter as 1s 
 found in any section of the Pentateuch. Thus, 
 for instance, the 17th chapter of the Ritual in a 
 papyrus, of which a facsimile has been pub- 
 lished by M. de Rougé, occupies one page of 
 49 lines: each line is equivalent to three lines of 
 Hebrew, as may be proved by transcription of 
 the two languages in Egyptian and Pheenician 
 
238 
 
 were apparently so arranged for the con- 
 venience of public reading. This is a 
 point of importance, accounting to a great 
 extent for apparent breaks in the narra- 
 tive,and for repetitions, which have been 
 attributed to the carelessness of the com- 
 piler, who is supposed to have brought 
 separate and unconnected fragments 
 into a semblance of order. 
 
 The first seven verses are introduc- 
 tory to the whole book. In accordance 
 with the almost invariable custom of 
 the writer, we find a brief recapitulation 
 of preceding events, and a statement of 
 the actual condition of affairs. The 
 names of the Patriarchs and the number 
 of distinct families at the time of the 
 immigration into Egypt are stated in 
 Six verses: a single paragraph then re- 
 cords the rapid and continuous increase 
 of the Israelites after the death of Joseph 
 and his contemporaries. 
 
 The narrative begins with the 8th 
 verse, c. 1. The subdivision which in- 
 cludes the first two chapters relates very 
 briefly the events which prepared the 
 way for the Exodus: the accession of 
 a new king, followed by a change of 
 policy and measures of extreme cruelty 
 towards the Israelites; and the birth 
 and early history of Moses, destined to 
 be their deliverer. The second division, 
 from c. ill. 1 to vi. I, opens after an inter- 
 val of some forty years. From this point 
 the narrative is full and circumstantial. 
 
 letters. The longest section in the Pentateuch 
 scarcely exceeds 150 lines in Van der Hooght’s 
 edition. Several papyri of the 18th dynasty 
 are of considerable length. Thus, the papyrus 
 called Anastasi I., in the British Museum, cone 
 tains 28 pages, each page of g lines, equal to 
 three lines of ancient Hebrew characters. This 
 exceeds the length of any one division of the Pen- 
 tateuch. The papyrus in question is undoubt- 
 edly of the age in which the generality of modern 
 critics hold the Exodus to have occurred. The 
 assertion that Moses probably used parchment 
 rests on the fact that it was commonly em- 
 ployed at an early time, and more especially, as 
 it would seem, for sacred compositions. Thus, 
 in an inscription of Thotmes III., either con- 
 temporary with Moses, or much older, we read 
 that an account of his campaigns was written 
 on parchment, and hung up in the temple of 
 Ammon, See Brugsch, ‘ Dictionnaire Hierogly- 
 phique,’ p. 208. A far more ancient instance 
 of the use of parchment in sacred writings is 
 given by M. Chabas and Mr Goodwin in the 
 ‘Egyptische Zeitschrift’ for Nov. 1865 and 
 June 1867. 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 It describes the call of Moses; the reve- 
 lation of God’s will and purpose; the 
 return of Moses to Egypt, and his first 
 application to Pharaoh, of which the 
 immediate result was a treatment of the 
 Israelites, which materially advanced the 
 work, on the one hand preparing them 
 for departure from their homes, and on 
 the other. attaching them more closely 
 to their native officers by the bonds of 
 common suffering. | 
 
 C. vl. 2—27 forms a distinct portion. 
 Moses is instructed to explain the bear- 
 ings of the Divine name (of which the 
 meaning had been previously intimated, 
 see lll. 14) upon the relations of God 
 to the people. He then receives a 
 renewal of his mission to the Israelites 
 and to Pharaoh, Aaron being formally 
 appointed as his coadjutor: the gene- 
 alogy of both is then introduced, mark- 
 ing their position as leaders of the 
 people. er? 
 
 This portion stands in its right place. 
 It is necessary to the full understanding 
 of the following, and is closely con- 
 nected with the preceding, section; but 
 it stands apart from both, it begins with 
 a solemn declaration and ends with a 
 distinct announcement. 
 
 c. vi. 28 to the end/oneeaiaeee 
 this division the narrative makes a 
 fresh start. It begins, as usual in a 
 new section, with a brief statement to 
 remind the reader of the relative posi- 
 tion of Moses and Aaron and of the 
 work appointed to them. ‘Then follows 
 in unbroken order the history of nine 
 plagues, in three groups, each increasing 
 in severity. At the close of this division 
 the tenth and most terrible plague: is 
 denounced, and the failure of the other 
 nine, in turning Pharaoh, is declared in 
 the often recurring form, “the Lord 
 hardened Pharaoh’s heart, so that he 
 would not let the children of Israel go 
 out of his land” (xi. 10). 
 
 The next section, xii. 1—42, gives an 
 account of the institution of the Pass- 
 over, and the departure of the Israelites 
 from Rameses: the close of the section 
 is distinctly marked by the chronological 
 statement. This important section is 
 closely connected with the preceding 
 narrative, but it was evidently intended 
 to be read as a separate lesson, and may 
 
THE BOOK OF EXODUS. 
 
 -possibly have been rewritten or revised 
 ‘for that purpose towards the close of 
 the life of Moses. From xii, 43 to xill. 16 
 special injunctions touching the Passover 
 are recorded; they may have been in- 
 serted here as the most appropriate place 
 when the separate documents were put 
 together. 
 
 The narrative begins again c. xill. 17. 
 After a brief introduction, stating the 
 general direction of the journey, comes 
 the history of the march towards the 
 Red Sea, the passage across it, and the 
 -destruction of Pharaoh’s host. This 
 subdivision extends to the end of the 
 -xivth chapter. 
 
 The Song of Moses’ is inserted here: 
 it does not interrupt the narrative, which 
 ‘proceeds without a break until, in the 
 third month after the Exodus, Israel 
 came to the Wilderness of Sinai and 
 camped before the Mount: c. xix. In 
 this chapter and the next the promulga- 
 tion of the law is described. The re- 
 mainder of the book gives the directions 
 received by Moses touching the Taber- 
 nacle and its appurtenances, and the 
 institution of the Aaronic priesthood. 
 It then relates the sin of the Israelites, 
 and their forgiveness at the intercession 
 of Moses: and concludes with an ac- 
 count of the making of the tabernacle, 
 and a description of the symbolical 
 
 1 The length and structure of this great hymn 
 have been represented as proofs of a later origin. 
 A comparison with Egyptian poems of the age 
 of Moses, or much earlier, gives these results. 
 The hymn to the Nile, in the ‘Pap. Sallier,’ 11., 
 was written at the time when the Exodus is fixed 
 by most Egyptologers. It is more than twice 
 the length of the Song of Moses. 
 is elaborate and the cadences resemble the He- 
 brew. It begins thus, ‘‘ Hail, O Nile, thou 
 comest forth over this land, thou comest in peace, 
 giving life to Egypt, O hidden God.” Again, a 
 poem inscribed on the walls of a temple built by 
 Thotmes ITI. is about twice as long as the Song. 
 Its style is artificial and the cadences even more 
 strongly marked. It is some two centuries older 
 than the hymn to the Nile. We have also exact 
 information as to the time which it would take 
 to write out such a hymn. An Egyptian scribe 
 writing, with the greatest care, with rubrical head- 
 ings, &c. would have done it in half a day: afew 
 hours would suffice in the simpler characters 
 used by the Semitic races. This comparison 
 leaves no doubt as to the possibility of such a 
 hymn being written by Moses, who was trained 
 in the schools of Egypt ; and no one denies his 
 genius. 
 
 The structure | 
 
 239 
 
 manifestation of God’s Presence with 
 His people. 
 
 This general view of the structure of 
 the book meets several questions which 
 have been raised as to its integrity, 
 That the several portions are distinct, 
 forming complete subdivisions, may not 
 only be admitted without misgiving, but 
 this fact is best accounted for by the 
 circumstances under which the work 
 must have been composed, if Moses was 
 its author, It was the form in which a 
 man engaged in such an undertaking 
 would naturally present at intervals an 
 account of each series of transactions, 
 and in which such an account would be 
 best adapted for the instruction of the 
 people. The combination of all the do- 
 cuments into a complete treatise might 
 naturally occupy the period of compara- 
 tive leisure towards the end of his life, 
 and, while it involved some few addi- 
 tions and explanations, would be effected 
 without any substantial change. 
 
 § 2. The principal arguments for the 
 Mosaic authorship have been stated in 
 the Introduction to the Pentateuch: but 
 many objections apply especially to this 
 book; and some of the most convincing 
 evidences are supplied by its contents. 
 This might be expected. On the one 
 hand the question of authorship is in- 
 separably bound up with that of the mi- 
 raculous character of many transactions 
 which are recorded. Critics who reject 
 miracles as simply incredible under any 
 circumstances, have ever felt that the 
 narrative before us could scarcely have 
 been written by a man in the position 
 and with the character of Moses, and 
 could not certainly have been addressed 
 to eye-witnesses or contemporaries of 
 the events which it relates. It is a fore- 
 gone conclusion with writers of this 
 school. On the other hand a narrative 
 of the personal history of Moses, of the 
 circumstances under which the greatest 
 work in the world’s annals was accom- 
 plished, if it be authentic and veracious, 
 must abound in internal coincidences 
 and evidences sufficient to convince 
 any inquirer not shut up to the opposite 
 theory. In fact no critic of any weight, 
 either in France or Germany, who admits 
 the supernatural character of the trans- 
 actions, rejects the authorship of Moses, 
 
240 
 
 One argument is drawn from the re- 
 presentation of the personal character 
 and qualifications of Moses. In its 
 most important features it is such as 
 could never have been produced by a 
 writer collecting the traditional reminis- 
 cences or legends of a later age: not 
 such even as might have been drawn by 
 a younger contemporary. ‘To posterity, 
 to Israelites of his own time, Moses was 
 simply the greatest of men: but it is evi- 
 dent that the writer of this book was un- 
 conscious of the personal greatness of 
 the chief actor. He was indeed. tho- 
 roughly aware of the greatness of his 
 mission, and consequently of the great- 
 ness of the position, which was recog- 
 nized at last by the Egyptians, see ch. xi. 
 3; but as to his personal qualifications, 
 the points which strike him most forcibly 
 are the deficiencies of natural gifts and 
 powers, and the defects of character, 
 which he is scrupulously careful to re- 
 cord, together with the rebukes and pe- 
 nalties which they brought upon him, 
 and the obstacles which they opposed 
 to his work. His first attempt to deliver 
 the people is described as a complete 
 failure; an act which, however it might 
 be palliated by the provocation, is evi- 
 dently felt by the writer to have been 
 wrongful, punished by a long exile ex- 
 tending over the best years of his life. 
 When he receives the Divine call he is 
 full of hesitation, and even when his un- 
 belief is overcome by miracles he still 
 recoils from the work, dwelling with 
 almost irreverent pertinacity upon his 
 personal disqualifications, ch. ill. 1o—13. 
 On his homeward journey he is severely 
 chastised for neglect of a religious duty, 
 ch.iv.24—26. When his first application 
 to Pharaoh brings increased suffering to 
 his people, he bursts out into passionate 
 remonstrance. The courage and mag- 
 nanimity of his conduct to Pharaoh are 
 never the subject of direct commenda- 
 tion. No act is attributed to his per- 
 sonal character. Even in the passage 
 over the Red Sea and in the journeying 
 through the wilderness, nothing recalls 
 his individuality. Each step is under 
 Divine guidance: no intimation is given 
 of wisdom, skill, or foresight in the di- 
 rection of the march. ‘The first conflict 
 with assailants is conducted by Joshua. 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 ‘The only important act in the organiza- 
 
 tion of the nation, which is not distinctly 
 assigned to a Divine revelation, is attri- 
 buted to the wisdom, not of Moses, but 
 of his kinsman Jethro. The few notices 
 of personal character in the other books 
 accord with this portraiture: the repug- 
 nance to all self-assertion in the contro- 
 versy with Aaron and Miriam; the hasty 
 and impetuous temper which, manifested 
 on one important occasion, brought upon 
 him the lasting displeasure of God, and 
 ultimately transferred the execution of 
 his great work to the hands of his suc- 
 cessor Joshua. 
 
 Such a representation is perfectly in- 
 
 telligible, as proceeding from Moses him- 
 
 self: but what in him was humility would 
 have been obtuseness in an annalist: 
 such as never is found in the accounts 
 of other great men, nor in the notices 
 of Moses in later books’, What other 
 men have seen in Moses is the chief 
 agent in the greatest work ever intrusted 
 to man, an agent whose peculiar and 
 unparalleled qualifications are admitted 
 alike by those who accept and by those 
 who deny the Divine interposition’: 
 what the writer himself sees in Moses is 
 a man whose only qualification is an in- 
 voluntary and reluctant surrender to the 
 will of God. The only rational account 
 of the matter is, that we have Moses’ 
 own history of himself and of his work. 
 The next argument is even less open 
 to objection, since it rests not on sub- 
 jective impressions, but on external 
 facts. ‘The book of Exodus could not 
 have been written by any man who had 
 not passed many years in Egypt, and 
 who had not also a thorough know- 
 ledge, such as could only be acquired 
 by personal observation, of the Sinaitic 
 Peninsula. But it is improbable that 
 any Israelite between the time of Moses 
 and Jeremiah could have possessed either 
 of these qualifications; it is not credible, 
 or even possible, that any should have 
 
 1 See especially the three last verses of Deute- 
 ronomy, added either by a younger contempo- 
 rary of Moses, or at a later time by a reviser. 
 
 * The two writers by whom the greatness of 
 the character and work of Moses are perhaps 
 most thoroughly appreciated and developed with 
 greatest power are Ewald, ‘G. I.’ vol. I1., and 
 Salvador, ‘ Histoire des Institutions de Moise 
 et du peuple Hebréu.’ 
 
THE BOOK OF EXODUS, 
 
 combined both. Israelites may have 
 been, and probably were, brought into 
 Egypt as.captives by the Pharaohs in 
 their not unfrequent invasions of Syria, 
 but in that position they were not likely 
 to become acquainted with the institu- 
 tions of Egypt: still less likely is it that 
 any should have returned to their native 
 land. Again, no Israelite, for centuries 
 after the occupation of Palestine, is likely 
 to have penetrated into the Sinaitic Penin- 
 sula, occupied as it was by hostile tribes, 
 while it is certain that none could have 
 had any motive, or opportunity, for tra- 
 versing the route from Egypt to Horeb, 
 with which no one doubts the writer of 
 the Pentateuch was personally familiar. 
 The notices are too numerous, and inter- 
 woven with the narrative too intimately, 
 to be accounted for as mere traditional 
 reminiscences, or even as derived from 
 scanty records in the possession of the 
 Israelites at a later period. We have no 
 probable alternative but to admit that 
 the narrative in its substance came from 
 Moses, or from a contemporary. Either 
 alternative might suffice so far as regards 
 the accuracy and trustworthiness of the 
 narrative, and consequently the miracu- 
 lous character of the transactions which 
 it records; but we can have little hesita- 
 tion as to our choice between these al- 
 ternatives, when we consider that none 
 of the contemporaries of Moses had 
 equal opportunities of observation, and 
 that none were likely to have received 
 the education and training’ which would 
 have enabled them to record the events. 
 
 § 3. <A weighty argument is drawn 
 from the accounts of the miracles, by 
 which Moses was expressly bidden to 
 attest his mission, and by which he was 
 enabled to accomplish the deliverance of 
 his people. One characteristic, common 
 to all scriptural miracles, but in none 
 more conspicuous than in those record- 
 ed in the book of Exodus, is their 
 strongly marked, and indeed unmistake- 
 able, local colouring. ‘They are such as 
 no later writer living in Palestine could 
 have invented for Egypt. From begin- 
 ning to end no miracle is recorded which 
 
 - 1 On the education of Moses see note at the 
 end of ch. ii. 
 
 VoL. I, 
 
 241 
 
 does not strike the mind by its peculiar 
 suitableness to the place, time, and cir- 
 cumstances under which it was wrought. 
 The plagues are each and all Egyptian ; 
 and the modes by which the people’s 
 wants are supplied “in the Sinaitic Penin- 
 sula recall to our minds the natural 
 conditions of such a journey in such a 
 country. We find nature everywhere, 
 but nature in its master’s hand 
 
 Detailed accounts of the plagues and 
 of the natural phenomena in Egypt with 
 which they were severally connected 
 will be found in the notes; but it may 
 be well to bring together a few points 
 which shew the effects produced both 
 by the miracles, and by the apparent 
 failure of all but the last in determining 
 the immediate deliverance of the people. 
 The direct and indirect effects were in 
 fact equally necessary, humanly speak- 
 ing, for the accomplishment of that 
 event. 
 
 In the first place it must be remarked, 
 that the delay occasioned by Pharaoh’s 
 repeated refusals to listen to the com- 
 mands afforded ample time for prepara- 
 tion. ‘Two full months elapsed between 
 the first and second interview of Moses 
 with the king; see notes on v. 7 and 
 vii. 17. During that time the people, 
 uprooted for the first time from the 
 district in which they had been settled 
 for centuries, were dispersed throughout 
 Egypt, subjected to severe suffering, and 
 impelled to exertions of a kind differing 
 altogether from their ordinary habits, 
 whether as herdsmen or bondsmen. 
 This was the first and a most important 
 step in their training for a migratory 
 life in the desert. 
 
 Towards the end of June, at the be- 
 ginning of the rise of the annual inun- 
 dation, the first series of plagues began. 
 The Nile was stricken. Egypt was 
 visited in the centre both of its physical 
 existence, and of its national supersti- 
 tions. Pharaoh did not give way, and 
 no intimation as yet was made to the 
 people that permission for their depar- 
 ture would be extorted; but the inter- 
 vention of their Lord was now certain ; 
 the people, on their return wearied and 
 exhausted from the search for stubble, 
 had an interval of suspense. Three 
 
 se 
 
242 
 
 months appear to have intervened be- 
 tween this and the next plague. ‘There 
 must have been a movement among all 
 the families of Israel; as they recapitu- 
 lated their wrongs and hardships, the suf- 
 ferings of their officers, and their own 
 position of hopeless antagonism to their 
 oppressors, it is impossible that they 
 should not have looked about them, 
 calculated their numbers and resources, 
 and meditated upon the measures which, 
 under the guidance of a leader of ability 
 and experience, might enable them to 
 effect their escape from Egypt. Five 
 months might not be too much, but were 
 certainly sufficient, to bring the people 
 so far into a state of preparation for 
 departure. 
 
 The plague of frogs followed. It will 
 be shewn in the notes that it coincided 
 in time with the greatest extension of 
 the inundation in September. Pharaoh 
 then gave the first indication of yielding; 
 the permission extorted from him, though 
 soon recalled, was not therefore ineffec- 
 tual. On the one hand native worship 
 in one of its oldest and strangest forms 
 was attacked’; on the other hand Moses 
 was not likely to lose any time in trans- 
 mitting instructions to the people. The 
 first steps may have been then taken 
 towards an orderly marshalling of the 
 people. 
 
 The third plague differed from the 
 preceding in one important point. There 
 was no previous warning*. It must have 
 followed soon after that of frogs, early 
 in October. It marks the close of the 
 first series of inflictions, none of them 
 causing great suffering, but quite suffi- 
 cient on the one hand to- make the 
 Egyptians conscious of danger, and to 
 confirm in the Israelites a hope of no 
 remote deliverance. 
 
 1 This has been shewn by Lepsius; see note 
 in loc. There is a curious vignette in Mariette’s 
 work, ‘ Fouilles d’Abydos,’ Part 11. Vol. 1. p. 30, 
 No. cvitz. It represents Seti, the father of 
 Rameses II., offering two vases of wine to a frog 
 inshrined in a small chapel, with the legend, 
 ‘The Sovereign Lady of both worlds.’ Ma- 
 riette’s work has been withdrawn from circu- 
 lation. 
 
 ? This peculiarity, which applies to the third 
 plague in each group, was pointed out by 
 Maimonides, 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 The second series of plagues was far 
 more severe; it began with swarms of 
 poisonous insects, probably immediately 
 after the subsidence of the inundation, 
 It is a season of great importance to 
 Egypt; from that season to the follow- 
 ing June the land is uncovered; culti- 
 vation begins; a great festival (called 
 Chabsta) marks the period for plough- 
 ing. At that time there was the first 
 separation between Goshen and the rest 
 of’ Egypt. ‘The impression upon. Pha- 
 raoh was far deeper than before, and 
 then, in November, the people once 
 more received instructions for departure ; 
 there was occasion for a rehearsal, so to 
 speak, of the measures requisite for the 
 proper organization of the tribes and 
 families of Israel. 
 
 The cattle plague broke out in De- 
 cember, or at the latest in January. It 
 was thoroughly Egyptian both in season® 
 and in character. The exemption of 
 the Israelites was probably attributed 
 by Pharaoh to natural causes; but the 
 care then bestowed by the Israelites 
 upon their cattle, the separation from 
 all sources of contagion, must have ma- 
 terially advanced their preparation for 
 departure. 
 
 Then came the plagues of boils, severe 
 but ineffectual, serving however to make 
 the Egyptians understand that continu- 
 ance in opposition would be visited on 
 their persons, With this plague the 
 second series ended. It appears to have 
 lasted about three months. 
 
 The hailstorms followed, just when 
 they now occur in Egypt, from the mid- 
 dle of February to the early weeks of: 
 March. The time was now drawing 
 near. The Egyptians for the first time 
 shew that they are seriously impressed. 
 There was a division among them, many 
 feared the word of the Lord, and took 
 the precautions, which, also for the first 
 time, Moses then indicated. This plague 
 
 % In an Egyptian calendar, written in the 
 reign of Rameses II., and lately translated by 
 M. Chabas, the 22nd of Tobi, corresponding to 
 January, has this notice, ‘‘Il y a des ouragans 
 dans le ciel ce jour-l&, la contagion annuelle s’y 
 méle abondamment.” ‘Pap. Sallier,’ {v. pp. 14, 
 15. This applies even more specially to the 
 following plague. 
 
THE BOOK 
 
 drew from Phataoh the first confession 
 of guilt; and now for the third time, be- 
 tween one and two months before the 
 Exodus, the Israelites receive permission 
 to depart, when formal instructions for 
 preparation were of course given by 
 Moses. The people now felt also for 
 the first time that they might look for 
 support or sympathy among the very 
 servants of Pharaoh. 
 
 The plague of locusts, when the leaves 
 were green, towards the middle of March, 
 was preceded by another warning, the last 
 but one. The conquest over the spirit 
 of Egypt was now complete. All but the 
 king gave way; see x. 7. Though not 
 so common in Egypt as in .adjoining 
 countries, the plague occurs there at 
 intervals, and is peculiarly dreaded. 
 Pharaoh once more gives permission to 
 depart; once more the people are put 
 in an attitude of expectation. 
 
 The ninth plague concludes the third 
 series. Like the third and the sixth, 
 each closing a series, it was preceded 
 by no warning. It was peculiarly Egyp- 
 tian. Though causing comparatively but 
 little suffering, it was felt most deeply 
 as a menace and precursor of destruc- 
 tion. It took place most probably a 
 very few days before the last and crown- 
 ing plague, a plague distinct in character 
 from all others, the first and the only 
 one which brought death home to the 
 Egyptians, and accomplished the deliver- 
 ance of Israel. 
 
 We have thus throughout the charac- 
 teristics of local colouring, of adaptation 
 to the circumstances of the Israelites, and 
 of repeated announcements followed by 
 repeated postponements, which enabled 
 and indeed compelled the Israelites to 
 complete that organization of their na- 
 tion, without which their departure might 
 have been, as it has been often repre- 
 sented, a mere disorderly flight. 
 
 There are some who fear to compro- 
 mise the miraculous character of events 
 by admitting any operation of natural 
 causes toa share of them. Yet the in- 
 spired writer does not fail to record that 
 it was by the east wind that the Lord 
 brought the locusts (Exod. x. 12) and 
 sent back the sea (xiv. 21), and by the 
 mighty strong west wind (x. 19) took 
 
 OF EXODUS. 243 
 
 back the plague that he had sent. Nor 
 is the miracle at all lessened, because 
 the winds of heaven were made God’s 
 messengers and instruments in the doing 
 it. In order to guard against misappre- 
 hensions from such readers, let us state 
 with some precision the view we take 
 of the miracles in Egypt. They were 
 supernatural in their greatness, in their 
 concentration upon one period, in their 
 coming and going according to the 
 phases of the conflict between the tyrant 
 and the captive race, in their measured 
 gradation from weak to strong, as each 
 weaker wonder failed to break the stub- 
 born heart. And king and people so 
 regarded them; they were accustomed 
 perhaps to frogs and lice and locusts; 
 but to such plagues, so intense, so threat- 
 ened, and accomplished, and withdrawn, 
 as it were so disciplined to a will, they 
 were not accustomed; and they rightly 
 saw them as miraculous and divinely 
 sent. This being clearly laid down it is 
 most desirable to notice that the pheno- 
 mena that are put to this use are such 
 as mark the country where this great 
 history is laid. No Jewish writer, who 
 had lived in Palestine alone, could have 
 imagined a narrative so Egyptian in its 
 marks. Much evidence will appear in 
 the course of the Commentary tending 
 this way; that the history was written 
 by some one well conversant with Egypt; 
 and we shall look in vain for any one, 
 other than Moses himself, who pos- 
 sessed this qualification for writing under 
 divine guidance the history of the eman- 
 cipation of the Israelites. 
 
 A point of subordinate, but in the 
 present state of biblical criticism of 
 practical importance, is suggested by 
 the view here presented. ‘The two facts 
 that between all the miracles there is 
 an intimate connection, and that each 
 and all are shewn to be nearly allied 
 to analogous phenomena recorded in 
 ancient and modern accounts of Egypt, 
 leave no place for interpolations of 
 any considerable extent, none certainly 
 for the introduction of any single visi- 
 tation. In the commentaries of some 
 scholars, to whose learning and ability 
 the student of Holy Scripture is deeply 
 indebted, some of the accounts are at- 
 
 Q2 
 
 Renee 
 
244 
 
 tributed to the Elohistic, others to the 
 Jehovistic writer. The arguments based 
 upon language are considered in their 
 proper places’; those resting on merely 
 subjective impressions, varying to a most 
 remarkable extent in writers of the same 
 school, are too vague and indefinite to 
 be capable of disproof, as they are inca- 
 ‘pable of demonstration, and will proba- 
 bly leave no trace in biblical literature ; 
 ‘but the characteristics here pointed out 
 are common to all the plagues, and they 
 are conclusive. In fact no one plague 
 could be omitted without dislocating the 
 whole narrative, and breaking the order 
 distinctly intimated, though nowhere 
 formally stated, by the writer. The re- 
 sults were brought about by the com- 
 bined operation of all the plagues; they 
 could never have been produced by a 
 merely fortuitous concurrence of natural 
 events, and the narrative which records 
 them, remarkable as it is for artlessness 
 and simplicity, is certainly not one which 
 could have been concocted from docu- 
 ments of different ages, constructed on 
 
 1 The attention of scholars is specially called 
 to the following list of words. They are either 
 found only in this book and marked 4. X., or 
 in the Pentateuch and later Psalms taken directly 
 from it, marked P. All marked E. have Egyp- 
 tian equivalents, and are derived from roots either 
 common to Egyptian and Hebrew, or found only 
 in Egyptian. 
 
 Ch. i. 7, were fruitful, E., increased exceed- 
 gngly, 2, E... o, <15;) taskmastérs,) 6. (Az, Ey 
 Pithon and Rameses, E. vw. 16, the stools, a. A. 
 oe, atk, b, H.. bulrashes,’ 1.0. pitch, i. 
 flags, E. river’s brink, E. wv. 5, wash, E. 
 v. 10, drew out, P. E. vw. 16, troughs, P., once 
 in Cant. iii, a bush, P. E. v. 12, stubble and 
 straw, E. vii. 3, magicians, sorcerers, E. 
 v. 22, enchantments, a »., E. v. 27, frogs, P. 
 E. _ viii. 13, lice, a. X., 2.¢. here and Ps. cv. 
 31, E. v. 17, swarms of flies, 4. X., E. ix. 8, 
 ashes, a. X., E. furnace, P.E. zw, 0 a boil, E. 
 breaking forth, T. blains, Dears elle eK 31, 
 flax, E. bolled, GAs Ss a ah 32, spelt, E. 
 not grown up, A: Ae he xii. 4, number, 4. A. 
 v. 6, two evenings, d. A. wv. 7, lintel, a. 2. 
 vu. 8, 11, passover, E. v.15, leaven, ad. X., E 
 xiii. 16, frontlets, P. . xiv. horse, E.. xv. 1, 
 hath triumphed gloriously, E. wv. 2, I will 
 prepare him an habitation? 4.A. wv. 7, heaped 
 up, @ A. wv. 8, congealed: in this sense, a. X., E. 
 v. 20, timbrel, "EL xvi. 3, flesh-pots, E.  v. 15, 
 manna, E. z, aooomer, ig. (84. pot, P. i. 
 
 It is to be observed that these words occur 
 indiscriminately in the so-called Jehovistic and 
 Elohistic passages. The list may be extended, 
 
 INTRODUCTION. TO 
 
 different principles, and full of internal 
 discrepancies and contradictions, It is 
 the production of one mind, written by 
 one man, and by one who had alone 
 witnessed all the events which it records, 
 who alone was at that time likely to pos- 
 sess the knowledge or ability sedan to 
 write the account. 
 
 § 4. The portion of the book, which 
 follows the account of the departure from 
 Egypt, has characteristics marked with 
 equal distinctness, and bearing with no 
 less force upon the question of authorship, 
 It has never occurred to any traveller 
 who has traversed the route from Suez 
 to Sinai, or from Sinai to Palestine, to 
 doubt that the chapters of Exodus which 
 touch that ground were written by one to 
 whom the localities were known from 
 personal observation. It is not merely 
 that the length of each division of the 
 journey, the numerous halting places are 
 distinctly marked; for although such no- 
 tices could not possibly have been in- 
 vented, or procured at any later period 
 by a dweller in Palestine, the fact might 
 be accounted for by the supposition, 
 gratuitously made, but hard to be re- 
 butted, that some ancient records of the 
 journey had been preserved by written 
 or oral tradition; but the chapters which 
 belong either to the early sojourn of 
 Moses, or to the wanderings of the Is- 
 raelites, are pervaded by a peculiar tone, 
 a local colouring, an atmosphere so to 
 speak of the desert, which has made 
 itself felt by all those who have explored 
 the country, to whatever school of reli- 
 gious thought they may have belonged. 
 And this fact is the more striking when 
 we bear in mind that, although the 
 great general features of the Peninsula, 
 the grouping of its arid heights and the 
 direction of its innumerable wadys are 
 permanent, still changes of vast, and 
 scarcely calculable importance in matters 
 which personally affect the traveller and 
 modify his impressions, have taken place 
 since the time of Moses; changes to 
 which, for obvious reasons, it is neces- 
 sary to call special attention. 
 
 At present one great difficulty felt by © 
 all travellers is the insufficiency of the 
 resources of the Peninsula to support 
 such a host as that which is described in 
 
THE’ BOOK 
 
 the narrative; a difficulty not wholly re- 
 moved by the acceptance of the accounts 
 of providential interventions, which ap- 
 pear to have been not permanent, but 
 limited to special occasions. But facts 
 can be adduced which confirm, and in- 
 deed go far beyond, the conjectures of 
 travellers, who have pointed out that the 
 supply of water, and the general fertility 
 of the district, must have been very dif- 
 ferent before the process of denudation, 
 which has been going on for ages, and 
 is now in active progress, had com- 
 menced. We have now proofs from in- 
 scriptions coeval with the pyramids, 
 both in Egypt and in the Peninsula, that 
 under the Pharaohs of the third to the 
 eighteenth dynasty, ages before Moses, 
 and up to his time, the whole district 
 was occupied by a population, whose 
 resources and numbers must have been 
 considerable, since they were able to re- 
 sist the forces of the Egyptians, who 
 sent large armies in repeated, but un- 
 successful, attempts to subjugate the 
 Peninsula. Their principal object how- 
 ever was effected, since they establish- 
 ed permanent settlements at Sarbet el 
 Khadim, and at Mughara, to work the 
 copper-mines’. ‘These settlements were 
 under the command of officers of high 
 rank, and are proved by monuments 
 and inscriptions to have been of an 
 extent, which implies the existence of 
 considerable resources in the imme- 
 diate neighbourhood. It is well known 
 
 1 Brugsch differs from all Egyptian scholars in 
 a point of secondary importance, holding that the 
 mines here were worked chiefly for the sake of 
 turquoises (see Leps. ‘Zeits.’ 1866, p. 74, n. 3); 
 but his treatise, entitled ‘ Wanderung nach den 
 Tiirkis Minen,’ gives a good account of the in- 
 scriptions. They are very numerous in the Wady 
 Mughara; the earliest dates from Snefru, of the 
 third dynasty ; 8 Pharaohs of the three following 
 dynasties have left many inscriptions, a consider- 
 able number belong to Amenemha III., dating 
 from his 2nd to his 42nd year; and one of great 
 importance describes an expedition under Ra- 
 maaka, z.¢. Hatasu, the widow of Thotmes II. 
 These inscriptions repeatedly speak of victories 
 over native tribes: the very earliest inscription 
 in existence, earlier than any in Egypt, records 
 a victory achieved by Snefru over the Mentu, 
 the general designation of the mountaineers of 
 the Peninsula. The mines were lately worked by 
 an Englishman, Major Macdonald, of whom 
 Brugsch gives a full and very interesting account. 
 
 OF EXODUS. 245 
 that the early Egyptian kings were 
 careful to provide for the security and 
 sustentation of the caravans and bodies 
 of troops, by which the communica- 
 tions with settlements under such cir- 
 cumstances were carried on: and every 
 spot where the modern traveller still 
 finds water on the route was doubtless 
 then the object of special attention’. 
 The vegetation which even now protects 
 the wells of Moses, from which the 
 dwellers at Suez obtain a supply of 
 brackish water, must have been then far 
 more luxuriant; and the seventy palm- 
 trees, which Moses found at Elim, 
 doubtless sheltered fountains, from which 
 streams far more copious than those 
 which now water the wady, flowed over 
 the adjoining district. See note, ch. xv. 
 27. Where the superficial water was in- 
 sufficient, it was customary in that early 
 age to dig wells of whatever depth might 
 be needed*; and every tree, now reck- 
 lessly destroyed, was the object of spe- 
 cial care, and even superstitious rever- 
 ence. During the long ages which 
 have elapsed since the Egyptian power 
 passed away, the Peninsula has never 
 been subjected to an Empire which has 
 had a sufficient motive, or sufficient wis- 
 dom and resources, to arrest the process 
 of deterioration: and every horde of 
 Arabs, who have since been virtually its 
 masters, bent only on supplying their own 
 limited wants, cut down without remorse 
 the shrubs and trees, on which the water 
 supply, and consequently the general 
 fertility of the district, mainly depend. 
 The aspect of the whole country when 
 
 2 In one of the most ancient papyri we find a 
 notice of a place called She-Snefru, that is, the 
 reservoir of Snefru, named after Snefru, the 
 earliest Pharaoh who is known to have estab- 
 lished an Egyptian settlement in the Peninsula 
 of Sinai, M. Chabas remarks ‘ She-Snefru 
 était sans doute lune des stations qu'il avait 
 disposées au desert d’Arabie, sur la route de la 
 Mer-Rouge.” ‘Les Papyrus Hiératiques de 
 Berlin,’ p. 39. 
 
 3 See, for instance, the inscription relating 
 to the gold mines near Dakkeh, explained by 
 Mr Birch.. It mentions a well 180 feet deep, 
 and another still deeper, on a route where water 
 could not be procured, dug by the order of 
 Seti I. and Rameses II. ‘The works of pre- 
 ceding Pharaohs, especially under the 12th 
 dynasty, were equally remarkable for fore- 
 thought. 
 
246 
 
 it was first visited by Christian pilgrims 
 who have left us accounts of their jour- 
 neyings, must have differed greatly from 
 that which it presented to the Israelites, 
 when, under the guidance of Moses, 
 they found pasturage for their flocks 
 and herds. But far greater is the differ- 
 ence at present. Under Turkish mis- 
 rule the Arabs carry on the work of 
 desolation with no effective interfer- 
 ence; no plantations are made, no wells 
 are dug, the fountains are unprotected ; 
 
 and as though natural causes were insuf- 
 ficient, the annual tribute demanded by 
 the Pasha consists in charcoal, each 
 contribution laying waste a whole dis- 
 trict. The devastation which began ages 
 ago has in fact continued without cessa- 
 tion, and if it goes on at the present rate 
 of increase, will ere long reduce the 
 whole district to a state of utter aridity 
 and barrenness. When Niebuhr visited 
 the country, at the beginning of the last 
 century, large supplies of vegetable pro- 
 duce were exported regularly to Egypt, 
 shewing that the original fertility was not 
 even then exhausted. Those supplies 
 have ceased; and the only wonder is 
 that so much remains to satisfy a careful 
 inquirer of the possibility of the events 
 recorded in Exodus. 
 
 Taking summarily the etait in this 
 part of the argument, we find the fol- 
 lowing coincidences between the narra- 
 tive and accounts of travellers. Absence 
 of water where no sources now exist, 
 abundance of water where fountains are 
 still found, and indications of a far more 
 copious supply in former ages; tracts, 
 occupying the same time in the journey, 
 in which food would not be found; and 
 in some districts a natural production 
 similar to manna, most abundant in 
 rainy seasons (such as several notices 
 shew the season of the Exodus to have 
 been), but not sufficient for nourishment, 
 nor fit for large consumption, without 
 such modifications in character and 
 quantity as are attributed in the narra- 
 tive to a divine intervention. We have 
 the presence of Nomad hordes, and an 
 attack made by them precisely in the 
 district, and under the circumstances 
 when their presence and .attack might 
 be expected. We have a route which 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO 
 
 the late exploration of the Peninsula, of 
 which an account will be found at the 
 end of the notes on this book, will 
 shew to have been probably determined 
 by conditions agreeing with incidental 
 notices in the history; and when we 
 come to the chapters in which the cen- 
 tral event in the history of Israel, the 
 delivery of God’s law, is recorded, we 
 find localities and scenery which travel- 
 lers concur in declaring to be such as 
 fully correspond to the exigencies of 
 the narrative, and which in some accounts 
 (remarkable at once for scientific accu- 
 racy and graphic power) are described 
 in terms which shew they correspond, 
 so far as mere outward accessories can 
 correspond, to the grandeur of the mani- 
 festation. 
 
 Throughout this portion it wil be 
 observed that the notices on which the 
 argument mainly rests are interwoven 
 with the narrative and inseparable from 
 it. Itis easy to assert that any single 
 notice may have been retained by oral 
 tradition, or preserved for ages in scanty 
 documents, such as were formerly sup- 
 posed to be alone likely or possible to 
 have been produced in the time of 
 Moses; and such is the course generally 
 adopted when any coincidence is pointed 
 out too clear to be explained away; a 
 course which, were it applied to any 
 secular history, would be condemned as 
 disingenuous or uncritical, making it in 
 fact impossible to establish the authen- 
 ticity of any ancient writing. But in 
 addition to the positive arguments thus 
 adduced, a negative argument at least 
 equally conclusive demands: attention. 
 No history or composition in existence, 
 which is known to have been written 
 long after the events which it describes, 
 is without internal indications which con- 
 clusively prove its later origin; contem- 
 porary documents may be interwoven 
 with it, and great pains taken in ages of 
 literary refinement and artifice to disguise 
 its character, but even when anachro- 
 nisms and errors of detail are avoided, 
 which is seldom, if ever, effectually done, 
 the genuine touch of antiquity, the xvods 
 apxatomperns, iS invariably and inevita- 
 bly absent. Whether we look at the 
 general tone of this narrative, the style 
 
THE BOOK OF EXODUS. 
 
 equally remarkable for artlessness and 
 power, or at the innumerable points of 
 contact with external facts capable of 
 exact determination, we are impressed 
 by the weight of this internal evidence, 
 supported as it has been, shewn to be 
 by the unbroken and unvarying tradition 
 of the nation to whom the narrative was 
 addressed, and by whom it was held too 
 sacred not to be preserved from wilful 
 mutilation or interpolation. 
 
 §5. An argument which many readers 
 may feel to be even less open to objec- 
 tion is drawn from the account of the 
 Tabernacle. In the notes on this part 
 of the work the following facts are de- 
 monstrated. 
 
 In form, structure, and materials, the 
 tabernacle belongs altogether to the wil- 
 derness. The wood used in the struc- 
 ture is found there in abundance. It 
 appears not to have been used by the 
 Israelites in Palestine; when the temple 
 was rebuilt it was replaced by cedar. 
 (See note on xxv. 10.) The whole was a 
 tent, not a fixed structure, such as would 
 naturally have been set up, and in point 
 of fact was very soon set up, in Palestine; 
 where wooden doors and probably a sur- 
 rounding wall existed under the Judges 
 of Israel. The skins and other native 
 materials belong equally to the locality. 
 One material which entered largely into 
 the construction, the skin of the T'achash, 
 was in all probability derived from the 
 Red Sea; with the exception of one re- 
 ference in Ezekiel xvi. 10, no traces of 
 its use are found at a later period, or 
 in any other district. The metals, bronze, 
 silver and gold, were those which the 
 Israelites knew, and doubtless brought 
 with them from Egypt; nor is it proba- 
 ble that they possessed equal resources 
 for a long time after their settlement in 
 Palestine. ‘The names of many of the 
 materials and implements which they 
 used, and the furniture and accessories 
 of the tabernacle, the dress and orna- 
 ments of the priests, are shewn to have 
 been Egyptian. It is also certain that 
 the arts required for the construction 
 of the tabernacle, and for all its acces- 
 sories, were precisely those for which 
 the Egyptians had been remarkable for 
 ages; such as artizans who had lived 
 
 247 
 
 under the influence of Egyptian civiliza- 
 tion would naturally have learned. The 
 rich embroidery of the hangings, the 
 carving of the cherubic forms, the or- 
 namentation of the capitals, the natu- 
 ralistic character of the embellishments, 
 were all things with which the Israelites 
 had been familiar in Egypt; but which 
 for ages after their settlement in Pales- 
 tine, in which the traces of Canaanitish 
 culture had been destroyed as savouring 
 of idolatry, and where the people were 
 carefully separated from the contagious 
 influences of other nations on a par 
 with Egypt, must have died out, if not 
 from their remembrance, yet from all 
 practical application. There are ex- 
 ceedingly few indications of any such arts 
 among the Israelites during the period 
 from the occupation of Palestine to the 
 accession of Solomon; the ephod of Mi- 
 cah, and the teraphim in David’s bed, 
 being scarcely noticeable exceptions. It 
 is improbable that any portion of the 
 decorations of the tabernacle could have 
 been produced, even had the rich mate- 
 rials been forthcoming; and it is to be 
 noted as a fact of very special importance 
 in this inquiry, that when Solomon, in 
 the height of his prosperity, with the re- 
 sources of a vast empire at his disposal, 
 erected the temple which was to re- 
 place the tabernacle, he was compelled 
 to seek the aid of foreigners, and to bring 
 Tyrian artists to accomplish the work 
 which Bezaleel had produced, when his 
 native genius, trained in the school of 
 Egypt, was developed by the Spirit of 
 God. 
 
 The peculiar way in which the history 
 of the erection of the Tabernacle is re- 
 corded suggests another argument, which 
 has not hitherto received due attention. 
 Two separate accounts are given. In 
 the first Moses relates the instructions 
 which he received, in the second he 
 describes the accomplishment of the 
 work. Nothing would be less in ac- 
 cordance with the natural order of a 
 history written at a later period than 
 this double account. It has been re- 
 presented as an argument for a double 
 authorship, as though two sets of docu- 
 ments had been carelessly or supersti- 
 tiously adopted by a compiler. It 1s 
 
248 
 
 however fully accounted for by the 
 obvious hypothesis, adopted through- 
 out this part of the commentary, that 
 each part of the narrative was written 
 at the time, and on the occasion, to 
 which it immediately refers. When Mo- 
 ses received these instructions he wrote 
 a full account of them for the informa- 
 tion of’ the people. This was on all 
 accounts probable and necessary: among 
 other obvious reasons it was necessary 
 in order that the people might learn 
 exactly what amount of materials and 
 what amount of work would be required 
 of them. When again he had executed 
 his task, it was equally proper, and 
 doubtless also in accordance with the 
 habits of a’ people keen and jealous in 
 the management of their affairs, and at 
 no time free from tendencies to sus- 
 picion, that he should give a formal 
 account of every detail in its execution’: 
 a proof, to such as might call for proof, 
 that all their precious offerings had been 
 devoted to the purpose; and what was 
 of far more importance, that the divine 
 instructions had been completely and 
 literally obeyed. It is a curious fact, 
 that in the two accounts the order of the 
 narrative is systematically reversed. In 
 the instructions given to Moses and re- 
 corded for the information of the people, 
 the most important objects stand first. 
 The ark, the mercy-seat, the cherubs, 
 the table:of shew-bread, the golden can- 
 dlestick, the whole series of symbolic 
 forms by which the national mind was 
 framed to comprehend the character of 
 the divine revelation, are presented at 
 once to the worshippers. Then come 
 instructions for the tabernacle, its equip- 
 ments and accessories; and when all 
 else is completed, the dress and orna- 
 ments of the officiating priests. But 
 when the work of Bezaleel and his assist- 
 ants is described, the structure of the 
 tabernacle comes first, as it naturally 
 
 1 Tt is also to be observed that a very large 
 portion of the papyri, written at nearly the same 
 period in Egypt, consist of minute accounts of 
 the work done, and the sums expended under 
 the superintendence of the writers. In an in- 
 scription on the statue of an Egyptian architect, 
 Bokenchons, who lived under Sethos I. and 
 Rameses II., special note is made of his accu- 
 racy in accounting for expensive buildings. 
 
 INTRODUCTION TO ° 
 
 would do when the work was commenced; 
 the place was first prepared, and then 
 the ark and all the sacred vessels, ac- 
 cording to all that the Lord commanded 
 Moses. 
 
 § 6. The Chronology of Exodus in- 
 volves two questions, the duration of the 
 sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt, and 
 the date of their departure. So far as 
 regards the direct statements in the He- 
 brew text, the answers to both questions 
 are positive and unambiguous. Exodus 
 xli. 40 gives 430 years for the sojourn, 
 Genesis xv. 13 gives 400 years for the 
 whole, or the greater portion of the same 
 period. Again, the rst book of Kings, c. 
 vi. 1, fixes the Exodus at 480 years before 
 the building of the Temple in the fourth 
 year of Solomon’s reign. This would 
 settle the date within a few years, about 
 1490 B.C. See note onc. Xil. 40. 
 
 Both statements are taken in their ob- 
 vious and literal meaning by critics of 
 different schools in Germany and Eng- 
 land. The latter statement presents some 
 difficulties. On the one hand it involves 
 a longer period than appears to be con- 
 sistent with the genealogies, especially 
 with the genealogy of David. ‘This ob- 
 jection loses its weight if the omission 
 of several links in the genealogies be 
 admitted as probable: in some cases of 
 the highest importance it is certain, ¢.g. 
 in that of Ezra and of our Lord. On 
 the other hand it involves a shorter 
 period than is deduced from notices in 
 the book of Judges; an objection met 
 by the probable hypothesis that many 
 transactions in that book may have taken 
 place at the same period in different 
 parts of Palestine. Egyptian chrono- 
 logy is too uncertain to determine the 
 question, as is shewn in the Appendix. 
 The date appears on the whole to be 
 reconcileable with the facts of history, 
 and to rest on higher authority than any 
 other which has been proposed. j 
 
 The grounds on which the duration 
 of the sojourn is determined are con- 
 sidered in the note at the end of c, xi. 
 It is especially important with reference 
 to the number of the Israelites, which 
 amounted to 600,000 males at the time 
 of the Exodus. Such an increase of a 
 patriarchal family within 215 years, the 
 
THE BOOK OF EXODUS. 
 
 period deduced by the Rabbins from 
 genealogical computations, and adopted 
 by many theologians, presents great, if 
 not insuperable difficulties, which are 
 removed if we accept the statement of 
 
 Moses in the sense attached to it by. 
 
 most commentators. It needs no ela- 
 borate calculation to shew that in a 
 period extending over more than four 
 centuries, a family which counted 7o 
 males with their households, probably 
 amounting to many hundreds, occupy- 
 ing the most fertile district in Egypt, 
 under circumstances most favourable to 
 
 rapid and continuous increase specially . 
 
 recorded in this book, should become a 
 mighty nation, such as they are repre- 
 sented in the narrative, and as critics 
 
 249 
 
 admit they must have been to effect the 
 conquest of Canaan and to retain their 
 national integrity in the midst of a hostile 
 population. 
 
 The commentary on this book was 
 originally assigned to the Rev. R. C. 
 Pascoe, Principal of the Theological 
 college at Exeter. His death in June 
 1868 was preceded by a long illness, 
 which prevented him from preparing 
 notes which could be used for this work. 
 In consequence of this very serious loss 
 the first 19 chapters, together with the 
 Introduction and appendices on Egyptian 
 subjects, were undertaken by the Editor, 
 and the remainder by the Rev. S. Clarke. 
 
THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES, 
 
 CALLED 
 
 EXO Was. 
 
 CHAPTER+I, 
 
 1 The children of Israel, after Foseph’s death, 
 do multiply. 8 The more they are oppressed 
 by a new king, the more they multiply. 15 
 Lhe godliness of the midwives, in saving the 
 men children alive. 22 Pharaoh commandeth 
 the male children to be cast into the river, 
 
 OW these are the names of the 
 
 2 Gen. 46. “children of Israel, which came 
 
 into Egypt; every man and his house- 
 hold came with Jacob. 
 2, Reuben, Simeon, Levi, and Judah, 
 3 Issachar, Zebulun, and Benjamin, 
 
 4 Dan,and Naphtali,Gad, and Asher. 
 
 CuAp. I.1. Now] Literally ‘‘and.” ‘This 
 conjunction is omitted by the LXX. but it 
 is commonly used at the beginning of the 
 historical books after Genesis, and here indi- 
 cates a close connection with the preceding 
 narrative. ‘This chapter in fact contains a 
 fulfilment of the predictions recorded in Gen. 
 xlvi. 3, that God would make of Jacob ‘‘a 
 great nation” in Egypt: and in Gen. xv. 13, 
 that the people of that land would ‘afflict 
 them four hundred years.” 
 
 every man and his household] It may be in- 
 ferred from various notices that the total 
 number of dependents was considerable, a 
 point of importance in its bearings upon the 
 history of the Exodus. See Gen. xiii. 6, xiv. 
 14, from which we learn that Abram had 318 
 trained servants born in his house. ‘The 
 daughters are not mentioned, nor are the 
 names of their husbands given; it is more 
 likely that they were married to their near re- 
 lations, or to dependents than to heathens; 
 and in that case they with their families would 
 form part of the patriarchal households. 
 
 5. seventy] This number includes Joseph, 
 his two sons, and by a mode of reckoning not 
 uncommon, Jacob himself; see Gen. xlv. 11, 
 xlvi. 27; Deut. x. 22. The object of the 
 writer in this introductory statement is to 
 give a complete list of the heads of separate 
 families at the time of their settlement in 
 Egypt. See note on Num. xxvi. 5. The 
 LXX. place the last clause, ‘* Joseph was in 
 Egypt,” at the beginning of the verse, an ar- 
 rangement which seems preferable, and is de- 
 fended by Egli; see ‘Zeitschrift fiir wissen- 
 schaftliche Theologie,’ 1870, p. 326. 
 
 5 And all the souls that came out 
 of the ‘loins of Jacob were ’ seventy + Heb. 
 souls: for Joseph was in Egypt a/- > Cen 
 re ady Tent 10. 
 
 6 And Joseph died, and all his 22. 
 brethren, and all that generation. 
 
 q@ «And the children of Israel Acts 7. 
 
 were fruitful, and increased abundant- ” 
 ly, and multiplied, and waxed exceed- 
 ing mighty; and the land was filled 
 with them. 
 
 8 Now there arose up a new king 
 over Egypt, which knew not Joseph. 
 
 7. ‘The narrative begins, properly speak- 
 ing, with this paragraph. This is clearly shewn 
 by the construction of the Hebrew, which 
 does not connect the word ‘was fruitful” 
 with the preceding verse. Egypt was always 
 celebrated for its fruitfulness, and in no pro- 
 vince does the population increase so rapidly 
 as in that occupied by the Israelites. See 
 notes on Gen. xlvii 6. At present it has 
 more flocks and herds than any province in 
 Egypt, and more fishermen, though many 
 villages are deserted; it is calculated that 
 another million might be sustained in it. (See 
 Robinson, Vol. I. p. 55.) Until the acces- 
 sion of the new king, the relations between 
 the Egyptians and the Israelites were undoubt- 
 edly friendly. ‘The expressions used in this 
 verse imply the lapse of a considerable period 
 after the death of Joseph. 
 
 the land was filled with them] i.e. the dis- 
 trict allotted to them, extending probably from 
 the Eastern branch of the Nile to the borders 
 of the desert. It appears from other pas- 
 sages (see ill. 22) that they did not occupy 
 this land exclusively, but were intermingled 
 with the native Egyptians. 
 
 8. ‘The expressions in this verse are pe- 
 culiar, and emphatic. ‘‘A new king” is a 
 phrase not found elsewhere. It is understood 
 by most commentators to imply that he did 
 not succeed his predecessor in natural order 
 of descent and inheritance. He ‘‘arose up 
 over Egypt,” occupying the land, as.it would 
 seem, on different terms from the king whose 
 place he took, either by usurpation or con- 
 quest. The fact that he knew not Joseph 
 implies a complete separation from the tradi- 
 
BXODUS. Li 
 11 Therefore they did set over 
 them taskmasters to afflict them with 
 their burdens.” And they built for 
 Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and 
 
 Raamses. 
 12 ‘But the more they afflicted ‘He. 
 them, the more they multiplied and “ey 4 
 Jiicted 
 
 grew. And they were grieved be-‘riem, so 
 
 cause of the children of Israel. Pie i 
 
 Vv. 9—12. | 251 
 And he said unto his people, 
 Behold, the people of the children of 
 Israel are more and mightier than we: 
 10 Come on, let us deal wisely 
 with them; lest they multiply, and 
 it come to pass, that, when there 
 falleth out any war, they join also 
 unto our enemies, and fight against 
 us, and so get them up out of the land. 
 
 tions of Lower Egypt. At present the gene- 
 rality of Egyptian scholars identify this Pha- 
 raoh with Rameses II. The question is dis- 
 cussed in the Appendix, where it is shewn that 
 all the conditions of the narrative are fulfilled 
 in the person of Amosis I., the head of the 
 18th Dynasty. He was the descendant of the 
 old Theban sovereigns, but his family resided 
 for many years at Eileithyia, (El Kab, south 
 of ‘Thebes, ) and was tributary to the Dynasty 
 of the Shepherds, the Hyksos of Manetho, then 
 ruling in the North of Egypt. Amosis mar- 
 ried an Ethiopian princess, Nephertari, and 
 in the third year of his reign captured Avaris, 
 or Zoan, the capital of the Hyksos, and 
 completed the expulsion of that race. 
 
 9. unto his people] This expression has a 
 peculiar fitness as addressed by the represen- 
 tative of the old Egyptian kings to his coun- 
 trymen immediately after their emancipation 
 from the dominion of aliens. 
 
 more and mightier| ‘This may have been 
 literally true, if, as was natural, the king com- 
 pared the Israelites of Goshen with the popu- 
 lation of the North Eastern district after the 
 expulsion of the shepherds. The first im- 
 pression made upon his mind would be the 
 insecurity of a frontier occupied by a foreign 
 race. 
 
 10. any war] The king had good cause to 
 anticipate war. The North Eastern frontier 
 was infested by the neighbouring tribes, the 
 Shasous of Egyptian monuments, and war 
 was: waged with Egypt by the confederated 
 nations of Western Asia under the reigns of 
 his successors. ‘These incursions were re- 
 pulsed with extreme difficulty. In language, 
 features, costume, and partly also in habits, 
 the Israelites probably resembled those ene- 
 mies of Egypt, and were regarded by. the 
 Egyptians as their natural allies. 
 
 out of the land| ‘This is important as the 
 first indication of a motive which determined 
 the policy of the Pharaohs in dealing with the 
 Israelites: they apprehended the loss of revenue 
 and power, which would result from the with- 
 drawal of a peaceful and industrious race. 
 
 11. taskmasters| The writer uses the pro- 
 per Egyptian designation for these officers, 
 viz. Chiefs of tributes (see Note at the end 
 of the Chapter). They were men of rank, 
 
 superintendents of the public works (LXX. 
 emictatat Toy épywv), such as are often re- 
 presented on Egyptian monuments, and care- 
 fully distinguished from the subordinate 
 overseers. ‘The Israelites were employed in 
 forced labours, probably in detachments, 
 each under an Egyptian ‘‘taskmaster:” but 
 they were not reduced to slavery, properly 
 speaking, nor treated as captives of war. ‘They 
 continued to occupy and cultivate their own 
 district, and they retained possession of their 
 houses, flocks, herds, and other property until 
 they emigrated from Egypt. Amosis had 
 special need of such labourers. He restored 
 the temples and other buildings destroyed by 
 the shepherds, employing foreigners, either as 
 subjects or mercenaries, for the transport of 
 materials. ‘This is proved by an inscription, 
 dated in his 22nd year, see ‘ Aug. Zeitschrift,’ 
 November 1867. 
 
 treasure cities| ‘The Hebrew word corre- 
 sponds very closely both in form and mean- 
 ing with ‘‘ magazines,” depots of ammunition 
 and provisions: the same word is used 1 
 Kings ix. 19; 2 Chron, viii. 4 and xxxii, 28. 
 Captives were employed in great numbers 
 for building and enlarging such depots under 
 the Egyptian kings of the 18th and rgth 
 dynasties. 
 
 Pithom and Raamses| Both cities were situ- 
 ate on the canal, which had been dug or 
 enlarged long before, under Osertasen, of the 
 12th dynasty. ‘The names of both cities are 
 found on Egyptian monuments: the former 
 is known to have existed under the 18th dyn- 
 asty: both were in existence in the beginning 
 of the reign of Rameses II., by whom they 
 were fortified and enlarged. The name ‘“ Pi- 
 thom” means ‘‘ House or temple of Tum,” 
 the Sun God of Heliopolis. The name of 
 Raamses, or Rameses is generally assumed to 
 have been derived from Rameses II., the Se- 
 sostris of the Greeks, but it was previously 
 known as the name of the district. See 
 Genesis xlvii. rr, and Appendix. ‘The LXX. 
 add ‘‘ On, which is Heliopolis:” a reading com- 
 mended by Egli, l.c. but On existed long be- 
 fore that age. 
 
 12. they were grieved| ‘The Hebrew ex- 
 presses a mixture of loathing and alarm. For 
 ‘‘they” the LXX. read ‘‘ the Egyptians.” 
 
CL 
 
 2 LX ODUS.a; 
 
 13 And the Egyptians made the 
 children of Israel to serve with rigour: 
 
 14 And they made their lives bit- 
 ter. with hard bondage, in morter, 
 and in brick, and in all manner of 
 service in the field: all their service, 
 wherein they made them serve, was 
 with rigour. 
 
 15 @ And the king of Egypt spake 
 to the Hebrew midwives, of which 
 the name of the one was Shiphrah, 
 and the name of the other Puah: 
 
 16 And he said, When ye do the 
 office of a midwife to the Hebrew 
 women, and see them upon the stools ; 
 if it be a son, then ye shall kill him: 
 but if it be a daughter, then she shall 
 live. 
 
 eS 
 
 13. with rigour] The word is repeated 
 v. 143 but does not occur elsewhere. 
 
 14. morter and brick] ‘The use of brick, 
 at all times common in Egypt, was es- 
 pecially so under the 18th dynasty. An ex- 
 act representation of the whole process of 
 brickmaking is given in a small temple at 
 Thebes, erected by Thctmes III., the fourth 
 in descent from Amosis. ‘The persons there 
 employed are captives, taken by that Pharaoh 
 in his Asiatic campaigns. ‘They are under a 
 general superintendent, or ‘‘taskmaster,” and 
 are driven to work by overseers, armed with 
 heavy lashes, who cry out ‘‘ work without faint- 
 ing.” A report from a scribe at a later date, 
 under the 19th dynasty, shews the rigour with 
 which the labour, generally assigned to captives 
 or to slaves, was enforced. See Brugsch, ‘ His- 
 toire d’Egypte,’ p. 174, and Chabas, ‘Mélanges 
 égyptologiques,’ II. p. 121. Immense masses 
 of brick are found at Belbeis, the modern 
 capital of Sharkiya, z.e. Goshen, and in the 
 adjoining district. ‘There is no intimation 
 that the Israelites were employed in build- 
 ing pyramids, which were erected by kings 
 of Lower Egypt, with few exceptions, long 
 before this period. 
 
 all manner of service in the field] Not 
 merely agricultural labours to which the Is- 
 raelites were accustomed, but probably the 
 digging of canals and processes of irrigation 
 which are peculiarly onerous and unhealthy, 
 and on both accounts likely to have been im- 
 posed upon the Israelites. ‘The word used 
 throughout by the Targumist (see Note at 
 the end of the Chapter) is interesting; the 
 designation Fellahs, forced workers, is derived 
 from it. 
 
 15. Hebrew midwives] Or ‘midwives of 
 
 [v. 13—2Te 
 
 17 But the midwives feared God, 
 and did not as the king of Egypt 
 commanded them, but saved the men 
 children alive. 
 
 18 And the king of Egypt called 
 for the midwives, and said unto them, 
 Why have ye done this thing, and 
 have saved the men children alive? 
 
 1g And the midwives said unto 
 Pharaoh, Because the Hebrew wo- 
 men are not as the Egyptian women ; 
 for they are lively, and are deliver- 
 ed ere the midwives come in unto 
 them. 
 
 20 Therefore God dealt well with 
 the midwives: and the people multi- 
 plied, and waxed very mighty. 
 
 21 And it came to pass, because 
 
 the Hebrew women.” ‘This measure at once 
 attested the inefficacy of the former measures, 
 and was the direct cause of the event which 
 issued in the deliverance of Israel, viz. the 
 exposure of Moses. Two midwives only are 
 named. ‘They may have been the two chief 
 midwives, but it is not improbable that they 
 were the only ones in Goshen. At present 
 all travellers state that midwives are very sel- 
 dom employed by Egyptian women, never by 
 the common people, and by women of station 
 only in cases of peculiar difficulty. Two 
 might therefore have sufficed for the Israelites. 
 It may perhaps be inferred from this state- 
 ment that the object of the king was not to de- 
 stroy all the male infants, a course obviously 
 contrary to his interests, but those of the chiefs, 
 whose wives were alone likely to call in the 
 midwives. Both midwives bear names which 
 are supposed by some to be of Hebrew origin, 
 signifying personal beauty. ‘They were how- 
 ever probably Egyptians, as would seem to 
 be implied in the expressions in vv.17 and 19: 
 an Egyptian etymology of each name may ke 
 suggested: Puah from a word which means 
 ‘‘child bearing,” and Shiphrah, ‘ prolific.” 
 See Note below. . 
 
 16. upon the stools] ‘The Hebrew means 
 literally ‘‘ two stones.” The meaning is doubt- 
 ful, as the expression does not occur elsewhere, 
 but it probably denotes a peculiar seat, such 
 as is represented on monuments of the 18th 
 dynasty, and according to Lane is still used 
 by Egyptian midwives. So it is understood 
 by our translators, by the Targumist, and the 
 Arabian translator, Saadia, a resident in Egypt 
 and a man of great learning, whose authority 
 on such a point has considerable weight. 
 Gesenius, however, takes it to mean the stone. 
 
¥7-22. |'07 
 
 the midwives feared God, that he 
 made them houses. 
 
 22 And Pharaoh charged all his 
 
 |e ee SS 
 
 laver in which the newborn infant was 
 washed, and he quotes a striking passage from 
 Thevenot, stating that the Persian kings order 
 the newborn male infants of their relatives to 
 be killed in the stone basin in which they are 
 washed. See Note below. 
 
 921. made them houses] i.e. they mar- 
 ried Hebrews and became mothers in Israel. 
 The expression is proverbial, See 2 Sam. vii, 
 Ly 7; 
 
 22. Pharaoh thus made the people agents 
 in the crime. The command, though gene- 
 ral, may have been understood to apply to 
 the leading families by whom the midwives 
 had been employed, or to be in force until 
 the population was reduced, so as to remove 
 all apprehensions for the security of the fron- 
 
 NOTES on wy. 
 
 11. The Hebrew is D'DIN" tv’, Sare mas- 
 sim. Sar means chief, or prince in Semitic 
 languages, in Assyrian it has lately been 
 shewn to be the proper phonetic for king; 
 and it is common in Hebrew: but it is an 
 Egyptian title, found on very ancient monu- 
 ments, and it is the title specially given to the 
 head of the works in the representation of brick 
 making under Thotmosis III., to which allusion 
 is more than once made in these notes. ‘The 
 word massim has no satisfactory etymology 
 in Hebrew. Gesenius supposes it to be a 
 contracted form, Michaelis suggests an im- 
 probable derivation from Arabic. ‘The Egyp- 
 tian mas, gives a good and natural sense, 
 it means to bring tribute, #a5-mas to divide or 
 number in portions. See the Egyptian forms 
 in the Appendix. 
 
 14. The Chaldee paraphrase of Onkelos 
 is always meant when reference is made to 
 the Targum in these notes; it is of great 
 antiquity and authority. The Targum at- 
 tributed to Jonathan is of late date and 
 comparatively of little value. Saadia, who is 
 often mentioned, was a Jew of great learning, 
 a native of Fayoum in Egypt, towards the 
 end of the 9th century. His Arabic trans- 
 lation is printed in Walton’s Polyglott. 
 
 15. The Hebrew derivations of the two 
 names are not satisfactory. Simonis makes 
 MPip equivalent to AID, splendid, from yp), a 
 form for which there is no authority. Gese- 
 
 nius suggests the Arabic Adys, countenance; 
 
 BXODUSHT 
 
 people, saying, Every son that is born 
 ye shall cast into the river, and every 
 daughter ye shall save alive. 
 
 tier. The extreme cruelty of the measure 
 does not involve improbability. Hatred of 
 strangers was always a characteristic of the 
 Egyptians, see Gen. xlili. 32, and was likely 
 to be stronger than ever after the expulsion 
 of an alien race. Before Psammetichus 
 chance visitors were taken as slaves or put 
 to death, see Diod. Sic. I. 67. Under the 
 12th dynasty, in the time of Abraham, the 
 wives and children of foreigners were the 
 property of the king (Chabas, ‘Pap. Hier.’ 
 p- 14). The Spartans were even more guilty ; 
 they systematically murdered their Helots 
 when their increased numbers excited alarm; 
 on one occasion they slew 2,000, who had 
 offered themselves as volunteers at the invita- 
 tion of the state. Plut. ‘Lyc.’ § 28, and 
 Thuc, Iv, 80. 
 
 tly tAn Le atb. 
 
 this would require a change of letters, and is 
 quite improbable. The Egyptian gives a sim- 
 ple and very satisfactory etymology; pa=Y5 
 with one determinative or explanatory sign 
 means ‘‘splenduit” (coinciding in sense with 
 Simonis’ conjecture); with another and equally 
 common sign it means ‘‘parturio, accoucher 
 d’un enfant.” Brugsch, ‘D. H.’ p. 463. 
 Shiphra is rendered ‘‘child of Ra,” by Bunsen, 
 ‘Bibelwerk.’? ‘This is inadmissible; ‘‘sefi” 
 means ‘‘child,” but the transcription of both 
 syllables is inexact. The sense ‘‘ prolific” 
 given above is derived from one of the com- 
 monest words in Egyptian, Cheper; the tran- 
 scription is very close, the ch and sh being 
 regularly interchanged; the meaning ‘‘esse, 
 fieri, nasci, procreare,” with the additional 
 notion of rapid increase and reproduction, 
 
 16. Professor Selwyn proposes an emenda- 
 tion which would entirely remove the difficulty ; 
 instead of 05938 he would read 0'33, when ye 
 look upon the children. ‘The insertion of them 
 in the Authorised Version is unauthorised. 
 The only objection to the conjecture is that the 
 change from so plain and intelligible a reading 
 can scarcely be accounted for, Hirsch, chief 
 Rabbi at Frankfort, whose commentary has 
 appeared since these notes were printed, ob- 
 serves very truly that there is no authority for 
 the interpretation most commonly received of 
 DION, but the explanation which he suggests 
 is forced and improbable. Like many other 
 words it belongs to the age of Moses, 
 
 &5 
 
 a 
 
 ) 
 
EXODUS: IL. [veg 
 
 3 And when she could not longer 
 hide him, she took for him an ark of » 
 bulrushes, and daubed it with slime 
 and with pitch, and put the child 
 therein; and she laid z¢ in the flags by 
 the river’s brink. 
 
 4 And his sister stood afar off, to 
 
 254 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 1. Moses ts born, 3 and in an ark cast into the 
 flags. 5 He is found, and brought up by 
 Pharaoh's daughter. 11 He slayeth an Egyp- 
 tian. 13 He reproveth an Hebrew. 15 He 
 freeth into Midian. 21 He marrieth Zippo- 
 rah. 22 Gershom is borin. 23 God respecteth 
 the Israelites’ cry. 
 
 ser 6. ND there went %a man of the wit what would be done to him. 
 Numb. 26 house of Levi, and took to wife 5 @ And the daughter of Pharaoh 
 59. 
 
 came down to wash herse/fat the river ; 
 and her maidens walked along by the 
 river side; and when she saw the ark 
 among the flags, she sent her maid to 
 fetch it. 
 
 a daughter of Levi. 
 
 2 And the woman conceived, and 
 bare a son: and when she saw him 
 2. that he was a goodly child, she “hid 
 
 him three months. 
 
 Cuap. II. 1. a man of the house of Levi] 
 The marriage of Amram and Jochebed took 
 place so long after the immigration of the 
 Israelites, that it seems scarcely possible that 
 Amram should have been the grandson, and 
 Jochebed the daughter of Levi. The idiom 
 which calls even a remote descendant the son 
 or daughter is common to the Old and New 
 Testament, and this passage may be under- 
 stood to mean that both parents of Moses 
 were of the house and lineage of Levi. ‘Thus 
 the Vulgate renders the verse, ‘‘and he took 
 a wife of his own family;” the LX xX. has 
 ‘‘a wife of the daughters of Levi.” See the 
 Introduction, and note on ch. vi. 20, and 
 on Num. xxvi. 59. 
 
 2. bare a son| Not her firstborn, Aaron 
 and Miriam were older than Moses. In this 
 part of the book the object of the writer is 
 simply to narrate the events which led to the 
 Exodus, and, as usual, he omits to notice 
 what had no direct bearing upon that object. 
 It is remarkable that any critic conversant 
 with the style of the sacred writers should 
 have drawn from this omission an argument 
 against the accuracy or veracity of the writer. 
 
 a goodly child| ‘This is the only allusion in 
 the Pentateuch to the personal appearance of 
 Moses, upon which much stress is laid by later 
 tradition. Jochebed probably did not call in a 
 midwife, see note on ch. i. 15, and she was of 
 course cautious not to shew herself to Egyp- 
 tians. ‘The hiding of the child is spoken of as 
 an act of faith, see Heb. xi. 23. It was done 
 in the belief that God would watch over the 
 child. 
 
 3. an ark of bulrushes| Both of these 
 words, like the other words used in this 
 description, are either common to Hebrew 
 and Egyptian, or simply Egyptian. See 
 Appendix. ‘The ark was made of the papy- 
 rus which was commonly used by the Egyp- 
 tians for light and swift boats. ‘The species 
 is no longer found in the Nile below Nubia. 
 It is a strong rush, like the bamboo, about 
 
 the thickness of a finger, not quite cylin- 
 drical but three cornered, and attains the 
 height of 10 to 15 feet. It is represented 
 with great accuracy on the most ancient mo- 
 numents of Egypt; as for instance in the 
 tomb of Tei under the 6th dynasty. An 
 article on the Papyrus is given in the ‘Mé- 
 moires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et de 
 belles lettres,’ Tom. XIx. p. 156. 
 
 slime and pitch| ‘The ‘‘slime” is. under- 
 stood by most critics to be asphalt, but it 
 more probably means the mud, of which 
 bricks were usually made in Egypt, and 
 which in this case was used to bind the stalks 
 of the papyrus into a comipact mass, and 
 perhaps also to make the surface smooth for 
 the infant. ‘The pitch or bitumen (com- 
 monly used in Egypt, bearing the name here 
 used by Moses, ) made the small vessel water- 
 tight. 
 
 in the flags| ‘This is another species of the 
 papyrus, called tufi, or sufi, (an exact equiva- 
 lent of the Hebrew suph,) which was less in 
 size and height than the rush of which the ark 
 was made. ‘The brink, or “lip of the river” 
 is an expression common to Egyptian and 
 Hebrew; both words correspond in meaning 
 and form. ‘That which is rendered ‘‘ river,” 
 viz. Jor is not used in the Bible of any river 
 out of Egypt, except once by Daniel xii. 5, on 
 which see Ges. ‘ Thes.’ s.v. 
 
 5. the daughter of Pharaoh] ‘The tradi- 
 tions which give a name to this princess are 
 probably of late origin, and merely conjectu- 
 ral. Josephus calls her Thermuthis; which 
 means ‘‘the great Mother,” a designation of 
 Neith, the special deity of Lower Egypt: but 
 it does not occur as the name of a princess. 
 ‘The names Pharia, Merris, and Bithia are also 
 found in Syncellus, Eusebius, and the Rab- 
 bins. It is of more importance to observe that 
 the Egyptian princesses held a very high and 
 almost independent position under the ancient 
 and middle empire, with a separate house- 
 hold and numerous officials. ‘This was espe- 
 
v. 6—11.] 
 
 6 And when she had opened 7t, she 
 saw the child: and, behold, the babe 
 wept. And she had compassion on 
 him, and said, This zs one of the He- 
 brews’ children. 
 
 Then said his sister to Pharaoh’s 
 daughter, Shall I go and call to thee a 
 nurse of the Hebrew women, that she 
 may nurse the child for thee? 
 
 8 And Pharaoh’s daughter said to 
 her, Go. And the maid went and 
 called the child’s mother. 
 
 g And Pharaoh’s daughter said unto 
 her, ‘Take this child away, and nurse 
 
 cially the case with the daughters of the first 
 sovereigns of the 18th dynasty: in two in- 
 stances at least they were regents or co-regents 
 with their brothers. See Appendix. 
 
 The facts recorded in these verses, accord- 
 ing to M. Quatremére, suggest a satisfactory 
 answer as to the residence of the daughter of 
 Pharaoh and of the family of Moses. It 
 must have been in the immediate neighbour- 
 hood of the Nile, and therefore not at On or 
 Heliopolis, at which place Amosis put down 
 human sacrifices offered by the Hyksos: it 
 must have been near a branch of the Nile not 
 infested by crocodiles, or the child would not 
 have been exposed, nor would the princess 
 have bathed there: therefore not near Mem- 
 phis, where Amosis rebuilt the great temple 
 of Ptah, from which the city took its name. 
 At present crocodiles are not often found be- 
 low the cataracts, but under the ancient 
 empire they were common as far north as 
 Memphis. These and other indications agree- 
 ing with the traditions recorded by Euty- 
 chius (see Milman, ‘H. J.’ 1. p. 68), point to 
 Zoan, ‘Tanis, now San, the ancient Avaris, 
 on the Tanitic branch of the river, near the 
 sea, where crocodiles are never found, which 
 was probably the western boundary of the 
 district occupied by the Israelites. Avaris 
 was captured by Amosis, and was the most 
 suitable place for the head quarters of the 
 Pharaohs, both as commanding the districts 
 liable to incursions from Asiatic nomads, and 
 as well adapted for carrying out the measures 
 for crushing the Israelites. The field of Zoan 
 was always associated by the Hebrews with 
 the marvels which preceded the Exodus. See 
 Ps, Ixxviil. 43. 
 
 to wash| It is not customary at present 
 for women of rank to bathe in the river, but 
 it was a common practice in ancient Egypt. 
 See Wilkinson, II. p. 389. ‘The Nile was 
 worshipped as an emanation (dmoppon) of 
 Osiris, and a peculiar power of imparting 
 life and fertility was attributed to its waters, 
 a superstition still prevalent in the country. 
 
 1s: 6 i DUE we ee 
 
 it for me, and I will give thee thy 
 wages. And the woman took the 
 child, and nursed it. 
 
 10 And the child grew, and she 
 brought him unto Pharaoh’s daughter, 
 and he became her son. And she 
 
 called his name ' Moses: and she said, That is, 
 
 Because I drew him out of the water. ous. 
 
 1m 4 And it came to pass in those 
 days, when Moses was grown, that he 
 went out unto his brethren, and looked 
 on their burdens: and he spied an 
 Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of 
 his brethren. 
 
 (Thus Strabo, Atlian, and Pliny and Seet- 
 zen, Vol. III. p. 204. See also Brugsch, 
 ‘ Zeitschrift,’ 1868, p.123, and ‘D. H.’ p. 413.) 
 The habits of the princess, as well as her cha- 
 racter, must have been well known to the 
 mother of Moses, and probably decided her 
 choice of the place. 
 
 6. she had compassion on him| A touch 
 of natural feeling, to which throughout the 
 narrative Moses is careful to direct attention. 
 The Egyptians indeed regarded such ten- 
 derness as a condition of acceptance on the 
 day of reckoning. In the presence of the 
 Lord of truth each spirit had to answer, ‘I 
 have not afflicted any man, I have not made 
 any man weep, I have not withheld milk from 
 the mouths of sucklings.” See the ‘ Funeral 
 Ritual,’ c. 125. ‘There was special ground 
 for mentioning the feeling, since it led the 
 princess to save and adopt the child in spite 
 of her father’s commands. 
 
 10. he became her son| ‘This expression 
 leaves no doubt as to the formal adoption 
 of Moses. He became a member of the 
 royal household, where the training and edu- 
 cation which he received would be such as 
 St Stephen describes, he became learned in 
 all the wisdom of the Egyptians. (See Note at 
 the end of the Chapter.) Such a preparation 
 was indeed humanly speaking all but indispens- 
 able to the efficient accomplishment of his 
 work as the predestined leader and instructor 
 of his countrymen. Moses probably passed the 
 early years of his life in Lower Egypt, where 
 the princess resided ; all the notices in this book 
 indicate a thorough familiarity with that por- 
 tion of the country, and scarcely refer to the 
 Thebaid. ‘There may however be substantial 
 grounds for the tradition in Josephus that he 
 was engaged in a campaign against the Ethio- 
 pians, thus shewing himself, as St Stephen 
 says, ‘¢mighty in word and deed.” See ‘ Ex- 
 cursus’ I. at the end of the volume. 
 
 Moses] ‘The Egyptian origin of this word 
 is generally admitted. ‘The name itself is not 
 uncommon in ancient documents. ‘The exact 
 
25 
 
 12 And he looked this way and that 
 way, and when he saw that there was 
 no man, he slew the Egyptian, and 
 hid him in the sand, 
 
 13 And when he went out the 
 second day, behold, two men of the 
 Hebrews strove together: and he said 
 to him that did the wrong, Wherefore 
 smitest thou thy fellow? 
 
 14 And he said, Who made thee 
 
 meaning is ‘‘son,” but the verbal root of the 
 word signifies ‘‘ produce,” ‘‘draw forth.”. The 
 whole sentence in Egyptian would exactly cor- 
 respond to our version. She called his name 
 Moses, i.e. ‘‘son,” or ‘‘ brought forth,” be- 
 cause she brought him forth out of the water. 
 See Appendix, 
 
 11. Moses records no incident of his life 
 during the following years. His object, as 
 Ranke observes, was not to write his own 
 biography, but to describe God’s dealings 
 with his people. Later tradition would have 
 been full of details. At the end of 40 years, 
 when according to St Stephen, Moses visited 
 his brethren, the princess was probably dead, 
 as Syncellus relates, and the events which fol- 
 low took place under another Pharaoh. 
 
 awent out unto his brethren| ‘This shews 
 that the Egyptian princess had not concealed 
 from him the fact of his belonging to the 
 oppressed race, nor is it likely that she had 
 debarred him from intercourse with his foster- 
 mother and her family, whether or not she 
 became aware of the true relationship. 
 
 an Egyptian] ‘This man was probably one 
 of the overseers of the workmen, natives under 
 the chief superintendent, who are represented 
 in the well-known picture of brickmakers un- 
 der Thotmes III. See note onc. i, 13. They 
 were armed with long heavy scourges, made of 
 a tough pliant wood imported from Syria. 
 See Chabas, ‘ Voyage d’un Egyptien,’ pp. 119 
 and 136. ‘The discipline of the Egyptian ser- 
 vices, both military and civil, was maintained 
 by punishments of excessive severity, even in 
 the case of native officers. Hence the proverbial 
 saying, ‘*the child grows up and his bones 
 are broken like the bones of an ass,” and 
 again, ‘‘the back of a lad is made that he 
 may hearken to him that beats it.” (Cha- 
 bas, l. c. p. 136, and ‘Pap. Anast.’ v. 8, 6.) 
 The ‘smiting” must have been unusually 
 cruel to excite the wrath of Moses. ‘The 
 slaying of the Egyptian is not to be justified, 
 or attributed to a divine inspiration, which 
 Moses would not have omitted to mention; 
 but it is to be judged with reference to the 
 provocation, the impetuosity of Moses’ natu- 
 ral character, perhaps also to the habits de- 
 veloped by his training at the court of Pharaoh, 
 
 EX OU Sag 
 
 [v. r2—16, 
 
 ta prince and a judge over us! in-! Heb. 
 tendest thou to kill me, as thou killedst prince; * 
 
 the Egyptian? And Moses feared, 
 and said, Surely this thing is known. 
 
 15 Now when Pharaoh heard this 
 thing, he sought to slay Moses. But 
 Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, 
 and dwelt in the land of Midian: and 
 he sat down by a well. 
 
 16 Now the 'priest of Midian had 
 
 prince. 
 
 See the excellent remarks of St Augustine, 
 ‘c. Faust.’ xxl. 70. The act involved acom- 
 plete severance from the Egyptians; but far 
 from expediting, it delayed for many years the 
 deliverance of the Israelites. Forty years of a 
 very different training prepared Moses for the 
 execution of that appointed work. 
 
 13. did the wrong] Lit. ‘the wicked 
 one,” z.e. the aggressor. 
 
 thy fellow] Thy neighbour: so the 
 word should be rendered: the reproof was that 
 of a legislator who established moral obliga- 
 tions on a recognized principle. Hence in the 
 following verse the offender is represented as 
 feeling that the position claimed by Moses 
 was that of a Judge. ‘The act could only 
 have been made known by the Hebrew on 
 whose behalf Moses had committed it. 
 
 14. a prince] lit. as in the margin, a man, 
 a prince, The Hebrew for Prince is Sar, used 
 in i.r1. The word ‘‘Sar” implies the power, 
 ‘‘ judge” the right, of interfering. 
 
 15. Pharaoh heard it] No Egyptian king 
 would have left such an offence unpunished, 
 even had it been committed by a native of high 
 rank: it is not even necessary to assume the 
 death of the princess (see note on wv. 2) to rebut 
 the objection that her adopted son found no 
 defender. It is observed however (by Hirsch) 
 that the expression ‘‘ sought to kill him” im- 
 plies that the position of Moses, as adopted son 
 of a princess, made it necessary. even for a des- 
 potic sovereign to take unusual precautions. 
 
 the land of Midian] ‘The Midianites occu- 
 pied an extensive district from the eastern 
 coast of the Red Sea to the borders of Moab. 
 It is not improbable that in the time of 
 Moses they may have had a settlement in the 
 peninsula, at Sherm, where the two harbours, 
 the only safe ones on that coast, offered pecu- 
 liar advantages to them, engaged as they were 
 from the earliest times in the transport of 
 merchandize. (See Note at the end of the 
 Chapter.) 
 
 by awell] The well. ‘The well is spoken 
 of as well known, the chief feature of the 
 locality ; such was ’the case whichever site be 
 accepted as the residence of Reuel. 
 
 16. the Priest of Midian] Not ‘the | 
 prince” as in the margin, ‘The word Cohen 
 
 1 Or, 
 
Vv. 17—22.] 
 
 seven daughters: and they came and 
 drew water, and filled the troughs to 
 water their father’s flock. 
 
 17 And the shepherds came and 
 drove them away: but Moses stood 
 up and helped them, and watered their 
 flock. 
 
 18 And when they came to Reuel 
 their father, he said, How zs it that ye 
 are come so soon to day? 
 
 19 And they said, An Egyptian 
 delivered us out of the hand of the 
 
 may have that meaning in some passages, but 
 there is no reason for assuming it in this. 
 Josephus and most of the ancient versions 
 render it ‘‘priest.” A Jewish tradition, derived 
 probably from the Targum (which styles him 
 Rabba, or Lord), represents Reuel as the prince, 
 or probably as combining, like Melchizedek, 
 the hereditary offices of chieftain and priest of 
 the tribe, the Imam, the word used in the 
 Arabic Version. The name of Reuel, and the 
 detailed notices in c. xviii. (where see notes), 
 prove that he was a priest of the one true 
 God, known to the patriarchs especially under 
 the name FE]; although the great bulk of the 
 tribe, certainly those who lived farther north 
 and more closely in contact with the Hamites 
 of Canaan, were already plunged in idolatry. 
 The conduct of the shepherds may indicate 
 that his person and office were lightly re- 
 garded by the idolatrous tribes in his imme- 
 diate neighbourhood. 
 
 drew water| ‘This act would not be un- 
 becoming or uncommon for the daughters of 
 a priest whether chief of his tribe or not. At 
 present the watering of cattle in that district 
 is a work of maidens, from which even the 
 daughters of sheickhs are not exempt. See 
 Burckhardt, ‘Syria,’ p. 531. Thus Dr Stanley 
 speaks of flocks climbing the rocks or gathered 
 round the brooks and springs of the valleys 
 under the charge of the black-vested Bedouin 
 women of the present day. 
 
 18. Reuel] Oras in Num. x. 29, Raguel. 
 The name means ‘friend of God.” It ap- 
 pee to have been not uncommon among He- 
 
 rews and Edomites; see Gen. xxxvi. 4, 10; 
 1 Chron. ix. 8; Tobit vi. 10. Commentators, 
 who identify Reuel with Jethro, a point open 
 to grave objections (see Note at the end of 
 the Chapter), generally accept the conjecture 
 of Josephus, viz. that Reuel was his proper 
 name, and Jether or Jethro, which means 
 ‘‘excellency ”’ (corresponding, as Knobel ob- 
 serves, to Imam), was his official designation. 
 Moses naturally used the former name when 
 he first mentioned his father-in-law, on other 
 occasions he might take that by which the 
 Priest was probably best known to the Israelites. 
 
 Vot. I. 
 
 BAxAODYS: 
 
 IT. 
 
 shepherds, and also drew water enough 
 for us, and watered the flock. 
 
 20 And he said unto his daughters, 
 And where zs he? why zs it that ye 
 have left the man? call him, that he 
 may eat bread. 
 
 21 And Moses was content to dwell 
 with the man: and he gave Moses 
 Zipporah his daughter. 
 
 22, And she bare him a son, and he 
 
 called his name ‘Gershom: for he said, ¢ chap. 28. 
 
 I have been a stranger in a strange land. ~ 
 
 19. An Egyptian] Of course they spoke 
 judging from his costume, or language, 
 which must have been Egyptian at that time; 
 a slight coincidence, but such as may be 
 looked for only in a narrative of facts. Had 
 Moses lived long among the Israelites, the 
 Midianitish maidens would not have mistaken 
 him for an Egyptian: a later writer would 
 scarcely have noted the occurrence. 
 
 21. was content to dwell, with the man] 
 This conveys the true sense of the Hebrew. 
 It implies that Moses recognized in Reuel a 
 man in whom he could confide; and in his 
 family a fitting home. So quietly, and yet so 
 impressively, Moses records the entrance up- 
 on a long period, extending over forty years 
 of mature life. Moses tells us nothing of 
 what he may have learned from his father-in- 
 law, but he must have found in him a man 
 conversant with the traditions of the family 
 of Abraham; nor is there any improbability 
 in the supposition that, as hereditary priest, 
 Reuel may have had written documents con- 
 cerning their common ancestors. The use 
 of letters was well known to the Phcenicians, 
 whose trade with the dwellers in that very 
 district is recorded on Egyptian monuments 
 of the 13th dynasty, long anterior to the 
 age of Moses: (see Brugsch, ‘ Histoire d’ E- 
 gypte,’ p. 74,) and inscriptions which re- 
 cord the campaigns of Pharaohs of the 18th 
 and xgth dynasties, make express mention of 
 scribes and historians of nations, e.g. of the 
 Kheta or Hittites, who were probably not 
 in advance of the Midianites. 
 
 22. Gershom] According to most Hebrew 
 scholars the name is derived from a word 
 meaning ‘‘ expulsion.” ‘This, however, is 
 scarcely reconcileable with Moses’ own ac- 
 count, of which the Egyptian supplies an exact 
 and satisfactory explanation. The first syllable 
 ‘‘ Ger” is common to Hebrew and Egyptian, 
 and means ‘‘sojourner.” ‘The second syllable 
 ‘‘Shom” answers exactly to the Coptic 
 ‘‘Shemmo,” which means ‘a foreign or 
 strange land.” For the old Egyptian forms, 
 see Appendix. 
 
 R 
 
 257 
 
2538 
 
 23 { And it came to pass in process 
 of time, that the king of Egypt died : 
 and the children of Israel sighed by 
 reason of the bondage, and ciel cried, 
 and their cry came up unto God by 
 reason of the bondage. 
 
 EXODUS? TL 
 
 [v. 23—25. 
 
 2.4 And God heard their groaning,and 
 
 ’ 
 
 God remembered his 2covenant with ¢Gen. rs, 
 
 Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. g"y6. 4. 
 
 25 And God looked upon the 
 
 children of Israel, and God thad re- 1 Heb, 
 
 spect unto them. 
 
 23. in process of time| Nearly forty years: 
 some delay intervened between the call of 
 Moses and his departure for Egypt. ‘This 
 verse marks the beginning of another section. 
 We now enter at once upon the history of 
 the Exodus. 
 
 their cry came up unto God] ‘This statement, 
 taken in connection with the two following 
 verses, proves that the Israelites retained their 
 faith in the God of their Fathers. ‘The divine 
 name God, Elohim, is chosen because it was 
 that which the Israelites must have used in 
 their cry for help, that under which the cove- 
 nant had been ratified with the Patriarchs. 
 Dr Stanley would illustrate this by an ac- 
 count of the cries of the Fellahs in Egypt: 
 but the distinction ought to be marked be- 
 
 NOTES on vv. 
 
 10. The education which would be given to 
 a youth belonging to the royal household, and 
 destined for military or civil service under the 
 Middle Empire, has lately been illustrated by 
 the labours of Goodwin, Chabas, and other 
 Egyptologers, from the select papyri pub- 
 lished in 1844 by the Trustees of the British 
 Museum. ‘These documents belong for the 
 most part to the reigns of Rameses II. and 
 his immediate successors, but the literary 
 habits and attainments which they describe 
 are known to have been far more ancient; 
 collections of manuscripts, and scribes hold- 
 ing high offices of state, are frequently men- 
 tioned in the monuments of the early dynasties 
 (see M. de Rougé, ‘Recherches,’ p. 73), and 
 some of the most valuable papyri are pro- 
 ductions of the ancient empire. M. Maspero 
 has lately collected the most important facts 
 in the introduction to his work on a portion 
 of a papyrus of the rgth dynasty, entitled 
 ‘Hymne au Nil.’ 
 
 He observes that we know for certain that 
 a literary education was the first condition 
 for admission to the public service; the title 
 of scribe was necessary in order to obtain the 
 lowest appointment in the civil administration 
 orinthe army. Hence a real enthusiasm for 
 study is manifested by men of letters, such as 
 Enna and Pentaour, whose compositions, in- 
 deed whose autographs are preserved. We 
 have addresses to ‘Thoth, the Hermes of the 
 Greeks, the god of learning, in which the 
 
 tween their execrations, and the prayers which 
 reached God from the Israelites. 
 
 24. remembered| ‘This means that God 
 was moved by their prayers to give effect to 
 the covenant, of which an essential condition 
 was the faith and contrition involved in the 
 act of supplication. The whole history of Is- 
 rael is foreshadowed in these words. The 
 accumulation of so called anthropomorphic 
 terms in this passage is remarkable. God 
 heard, remembered, looked upon, and knew 
 them. It evidently indicates the beginning of a 
 crisis marked by a personal intervention of God. 
 
 25. had respect unto them] lit. and God 
 knew. The LXX. ‘¢and was known unto 
 them.” This involves only a change of 
 punctuation and may be preferable. 
 
 LOIS ele. 
 
 superiority of his work to all works is pas- 
 sionately maintained. ‘‘Thy works are better 
 than all works; he who devotes himself to 
 them becomes a noble; all successes achieved 
 in life are due to thee; under thy inspiration 
 a man becomes great, powerful, rich; of him 
 all the world, all generations of men cry out, 
 ‘Great is he, great is the work of ‘Thoth.’” 
 ‘The education so highly valued began at a 
 tender age; the infant, when it was weaned, 
 was sent to school, and there instructed by 
 scribes officially appointed. The discipline 
 
 ‘was severe, but due care was taken for the 
 
 child’s maintenance: the mother brought his 
 food daily from his home, and in the upper 
 schools rations of bread and salt fish seem to 
 have been supplied regularly by the govern- 
 ment: the register of distribution being, as in 
 our colleges, accepted as proofs of the scholars’ 
 attendance (see Chabas, ‘Voyage d’un Egyp- 
 tien,’ p. 23). 
 
 The scholar learned the elements of letters, 
 the rules of orthography and grammar; and as 
 he advanced, the art of expressing his thoughts 
 in simple and perspicuous prose, of which the 
 story of the two brothers in the D’Orbiney 
 papyrus is a fair specimen; or in the epistolary 
 style adapted for official communications, 
 which occupy a large portion of the papyri; or 
 in poetical composition, in which extant ex- 
 amples shew a genuine feeling for art; resem- 
 bling Hebrew poetry in the carefully balanced 
 parallelisms, and skilful combination of anti- 
 
TEXODy Oesal: 
 
 theses, though differing from it as markedly 
 in the absence of the essential characteristics 
 of simplicity and grace. It was indeed no 
 slight thing to master the qualifications of a 
 man of letters. The mere art of writing pre- 
 sented difficulties so serious that we find 
 scribes boasting of a thorough knowledge of 
 the mysteries of sacred letters as a rare and 
 wonderful attainment. According to Diodorus 
 special pains were bestowed upon arithmetic 
 and geometry, an assertion borne out by late 
 inquiries, which shew that the system of 
 notation was remarkably clear, and that exact 
 accounts were kept in every large household; 
 a treatise on geometry in the British Museum 
 now engages the attention of scholars, and 
 will probably be published by Mr Birch. 
 The mystic writings, in which ancient truths 
 were imbedded in dark and dreary supersti- 
 tions, occupied much of the time, not only 
 of the priests, but of all men of learning. 
 Schools of interpretation existed at an age 
 long before Moses, which have left abundant 
 traces in various readings, glosses, and mys- 
 tic explanations of the so-called Funeral Ri- 
 tual or Book of the Dead, a work which the 
 literal translation of Mr Birch, remarkable 
 for learning and ingenuity, has made to 
 some extent accessible to English readers. 
 The earliest extant copy of the chapter (the 
 17th) which gives the deepest insight into the 
 ancient theosophy of Egypt dates from the 
 rith dynasty, and has even in that form 
 numerous glosses bearing witness to a remote 
 antiquity. In an address to an officer of 
 rank, whose adventures in Syria have been 
 illustrated by Goodwin and Chabas, the scribe 
 whose autograph is before us, says, ‘‘ Thou 
 art a scribe skilful above thy equals, learned 
 in the sacred writings, chastened in heart, dis- 
 ciplined in tongue; thy words pierce me, one 
 phrase has thrice gone forth, thou hast broken 
 me with terror.” In a work just published 
 (‘Moses der Hebraer’) M. Lauth attempts 
 to identify this personage so remarkable for 
 talents, learning, and bold speculations on 
 religion, with Moses the Hebrew; an identifi- 
 cation not likely to approve itself to scholars, 
 but which serves to show the course of thought, 
 and to some extent the state of mental de- 
 velopment, in Egypt at a time not far remote 
 from that in which Moses became learned in 
 all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and mighty 
 in word and deed. 
 
 13. The question whether the residence of 
 Reuel was on the eastern or western coast of 
 the A‘lanitic gulf is not easily settled. ‘The 
 older and more general tradition is in favour 
 of the former. ‘The ruins of the city of Ma- 
 dian, described by Edrisi and Abul-feda and 
 visited by Seetzen, lay on the east of the 
 gulph, five days’ journey from Aila, 2. e. 
 Akaba, and a well was shewn there as that 
 from which Moses watered the flocks of his 
 
 father-in-lew. It would seem scarcely proba- 
 ble that Moses would be secure from pursuit 
 within the peninsula, which was frequented 
 by the Egyptians, who long before that time 
 worked the copper mines and carried on a 
 considerable traffic. Under the 18th and r9th 
 dynasties the power of the Pharaohs appears 
 to have extended over the whole country. It 
 is also to be observed that the Israelites did 
 not come into contact with the Midianites 
 while they were in the peninsula, and that 
 Jethro appears from the notices in ch. xviii. 
 vv. I, 5, 27 to have come from some con- 
 siderable distance to meet Moses. It is ob- 
 jected that the distance of this city would 
 have been too great for Moses to have pas- 
 tured the flocks of Jethro in the peninsula, 
 but we find instances of much longer distances 
 in the history of Jacob and Laban, and at 
 present in the accounts of the Bedouins. ‘Thus 
 Bochart, D’Anville, Mannert, and Quatre- 
 mere, ‘ Mémoires de |’Académie des Inscrip- 
 tions et Belles Lettres.’ 
 
 On the other hand it is argued by Laborde, 
 Knobel and others, that Reuel must have 
 lived on the west of the gulf. The communi- 
 cations between the two coasts have always 
 been frequent ; at present sheep and goats are 
 brought in great numbers from Mukna, near 
 Madian, for sale in the peninsula, and at dif- 
 ferent times settlements have been made by 
 Bedouins from the Hedjaz. ‘The TTowara, who 
 are now the most powerful and most civilized 
 tribe in the Peninsula, and have been recog- 
 nized as the true descendants of the Midian- 
 ites by most geographers (see Ritter, ‘ Sinai,’ 
 Pp- 936), occupied Madian in the time of Ma- 
 homet, who received one of their chieftains 
 with the exclamation, ‘‘ welcome to the bro- 
 thers-in-law of Moses, welcome to the race 
 of Shoeib, z.e. Jethro.” If Reuel lived in this 
 district, it must have been at Sherm, about ro 
 miles from Ras Mohammed, the southern 
 headland. ‘There are proofs that peculiar 
 sanctity attached to that place at a very early 
 period. ‘The notices of ancient geographers 
 (Strabo, Artemidorus, and Agatharchides, ap. 
 Diodor. Sic., collected and examined by 
 Knobel) speak of extensive palm-groves, abun- 
 dant sources of fresh water, and a sanctuary 
 under the charge of an hereditary priest and 
 priestess, who held their office for life. ‘The 
 same writers testify to the existence of an 
 ancient tribe in that neighbourhood bearing 
 a name (Mapuaveis) nearly resembling and 
 probably identical with Midianites; the d 
 and r are frequently interchanged, or con- 
 founded owing to the similarity of I and 9, 
 a similarity even more striking in the most 
 archaic forms of the two letters. ‘The place, 
 though sharing the general desolation of 
 Turkish provinces, is at present of some im- 
 portance. ‘‘ There are two large bays afford- 
 ing the only safe anchorage for large ships; on 
 the southern bay is the tomb of an unknown 
 
 R2 
 
 259 
 
260 
 
 sheickh, near the northern bay are several co- 
 pious wells of brackish water, deep, and lined 
 with ancient stones, apparently an ancient work 
 of considerable labour.” Burckhardt, ‘ Syria,’ 
 
 p. 53. 
 
 18. The identity of Reuel with Jethro rests 
 chiefly on the assumption that }M, which is 
 applied to Jethro repeatedly in the 3rd and 
 18th chapters, means ‘‘ father-in-law.” If 
 Jethro were the father-in-law of Moses he 
 would of course be the same person as Reuel. 
 But in all other passages when the word {NN 
 occurs, it means simply a ‘‘ relation by mar- 
 riage.” In the Pentateuch it is applied to the 
 sons-in-law of Lot, Gen. xix. 12, 14: to the 
 brother-in-law of Moses, Hobab, Num. x. 
 29: to Moses himself, as husband of Zipporah, 
 Exod. iv. 25, 26. In the book of Judges it 
 is used once (xix. 4) of ‘‘a father-in-law,” 
 twice of ‘‘a son-in-law,” twice of ‘‘a brother- 
 in-law.” ‘The meaning in other passages is far 
 more commonly son-in-law. ‘The LXX. uses 
 mevOepos and yauBpos. ‘The usage in Hebrew, 
 Syriac, and Arabic is the same. Thus Freytag, 
 
 wpas socer, vel omnis propinquus ab uxoris 
 
 parte, scil. pater ejus, aut frater, &c.: ita apud 
 genuinos Arates: vulgo autem est gener. Our 
 rendering follows the Targums and Saadia. 
 The Coptic word *‘Shom” has the same 
 
 CHAP DERS All 
 1 Moses keepeth Fethro’s flock. 2 God appeareth 
 to him in a burning bush. 9 He sendeth him 
 to deliver [srael. 14 The name of God. 15 
 fis message to Israel. 
 
 Cuap. III. The connection between this 
 chapter and the preceding is very close, al- 
 though many years intervened between the 
 arrival of Moses in Midian and the transac- 
 tions described in it. It marks however a 
 distinct epoch, the commencement of the se- 
 ries of events which immediately preceded the 
 Exodus. Hitherto the narrative has been stu- 
 diously brief, stating only what was necessary 
 to be known as preparatory to those events; 
 but from this point Moses dwells minutely on 
 the details, and enables us to realize the cir- 
 cumstances of the catastrophe which in its 
 immediate and remote consequences stands 
 alone in the world’s history. ‘This chapter is 
 attributed by some writers to the so-called 
 Jehovist; by others it is broken up into frag- 
 ments, in order to meet the obvious objection 
 that the name Elohim is found in it seventeen 
 times, that of Jehovah six times only. But 
 the internal evidence of unity is irresistible, 
 and the fact that both the divine names occur 
 far more frequently than in the preceding 
 chapters is sufficiently accounted for by our 
 
 E WO DUS. sa 
 
 iverr, 
 
 range of meaning. ‘The meaning “ circum- 
 cidit” has no authority in Hebrew, unless 
 the very improbable explanation of ch. iv. 21, 
 proposed by Gesenius, were admitted. The 
 relationship therefore between Jethro and 
 Moses cannot be decided by this word: it 
 depends upon the internal evidence of the 
 narrative. But Reuel must have been advanced 
 in years, having seven grown up daughters 
 when Moses arrived in Midian. When Moses 
 was eighty years old, it is more probable 
 that Reuel’s son had succeeded him in his 
 hereditary priesthood than that he was still 
 living: and no difficulty is presented by the 
 supposition that Jethro was the brother-in- 
 law, not the father-in-law of Moses. ‘The 
 identity in that case of Jethro and Hobab, 
 see Numb. x. 29, may be regarded as possible, 
 but by no means as certain. Jethro returned 
 to his own land before the promulgation of 
 the law on Sinai, nor does his name occur 
 afterwards. Hobab appears to have accom- 
 panied Moses on his journey, casting in his 
 lot with the Israelites (see Judges iv.11). He 
 may have been, and very probably was, a 
 younger brother of Jethro, not bound, like 
 him, to his own tribe by the duties of an he- 
 reditary priesthood. ‘This combination seems 
 to meet all the conditions of the narrative, 
 which would otherwise present serious, if not 
 insuperable, difficulties. 
 
 OW Moses kept the flock of 
 Jethro his father in law, the 
 
 priest of Midian: and he led the flock 
 to the backside of the desert, and 
 
 f 
 
 having here a record of the personal interven- 
 tion of the Lord God. 
 
 1. the flock] ‘The expression is precise 
 in Hebrew as in English, meaning not the 
 cattle, but the sheep and goats. At present 
 neither oxen nor horses are kept in the Penin- 
 sula, which does not supply fodder for them, 
 under ordinary circumstances. It was how- 
 ever far more fertile in the time of Moses. 
 
 Jethro his father-in-law] Or ‘brother- 
 in-law,” see note above. An indefinite word 
 such as affinis, signifying relation by marriage, 
 would be preferable, but Jethro was probably 
 the brother-in-law of Moses. 
 
 the backside] Gesenius explains this to mean 
 ‘to the west of the district.” ‘This follows 
 from the Hebrew system of orientation. The 
 East is the region which is looked upon as 
 before a man, the west behind him, the south 
 and north as the right and left hand. 
 
 desert] Or wilderness. ‘The word here 
 used does not mean a barren waste, but a dis- 
 trict supplying pasturage. ‘The district near 
 
v. 2—6.] Bas wWiss yl: c 
 
 4 And when the Lorp saw that he 
 turned aside to see, God called unto 
 
 261 
 
 came to the mountain of God, even 
 to Horeb. 
 
 Acts 7. 
 
 2 And the angel of the Lorp ap- 
 peared unto him in a “flame of fire 
 out of the midst of a bush: and he 
 looked, and, behold, the bush burned 
 
 him out of the midst of the bush, and 
 said, Moses, Moses. And he said, 
 Here am I. 
 
 And he said, Draw not nigh 
 
 with fire, and the bush was not con- 
 sumed. 
 
 3 And Moses said, I will now turn 
 aside, and see this great sight, why the 
 bush is not burnt. 
 
 hither: @put off thy shoes from off ¢ Josh. . 
 thy feet, for the place whereon thou %;,... 5, 
 standest zs holy ground. ae 
 
 6 Moreover he said, *I am the God « Matt. 22. 
 
 of thy father, the God of Abraham, *:t5 7. 32. 
 
 Sherm, where Jethro may have resided, is 
 described by ancient and modern travellers as 
 barren and parched; on the west and east are 
 rocky tracts, but to the north-west, at a dis- 
 tance of three or four days’ journey, lies the 
 district of Sinai, where the pasturage is good 
 and water abundant. ‘The Bedouins drive 
 their flocks thither from the lowlands at the 
 approach of summer. From this it may be 
 inferred that the events here recorded took 
 place at that season. 
 
 the mountain of God, even to Horeb| More 
 exactly, To the mountain of God, to- 
 wards Horeb. ‘The meaning is that Moses 
 came to the mountain of God, i.e. Sinai, on 
 his way towards Horeb. ‘The name Horeb 
 appears to belong to the northern part of the 
 Sinaitic range, and to reach it Moses probably 
 followed the road from Sherm, which passes 
 through the deep valley between the Gebel ed 
 Deir and the range terminated on the south 
 by the commanding height called Gebel Musa. 
 The tract which leads to the height is half 
 way between the two extremities, about three 
 miles distant from each other: this would 
 bring Moses to the lower part of the range 
 towards the north, which is best adapted for 
 pasturage. An argument is drawn from the 
 expression ‘‘mountain of God” against the 
 Mosaic authorship: but Moses, who appears to 
 have written, or to have revised, this book to- 
 wards the end of his life, may naturally have 
 given this name by anticipation, with refer- 
 ence to the manifestation of God. ‘The 
 paraphrase in the Targum gives the true 
 meaning, ‘‘the mountain in which the glory of 
 Jah was revealed to him.” On the other 
 hand, it is assumed that the spot was previ- 
 ously held sacred. For this there is no ancient 
 authority; though it has been lately shewn 
 that the whole Peninsula was regarded by the 
 Egyptians as specially consecrated to the gods 
 from a very early time. An inscription at 
 Sarbut el Chadem, dated the 25th year of 
 Thotmes III., speaks of an officer charged to 
 bring copper from the land of the gods. 
 
 2. the angel of the Lorp| Or an angel 
 of Jehovah; the article is not in the He- 
 
 brew. On the meaning and usage of the ex- 
 pression see note on Gen. xii. 7. In this pas- 
 sage it appears to designate a manifestation of 
 God by the agency, or instrumentality of a 
 created being. What Moses saw was the 
 flame of fire in the bush; what he recognised 
 therein was an intimation of the presence of 
 God, who maketh ‘‘a flame of fire His angel.” 
 Ps. civ. 4. The words which Moses heard 
 were those of God Himself, as all ancient and 
 most modern divines have held, manifested in 
 the Person of the Son. 
 
 out of the midst of a bush] Literally ‘‘of the 
 bush, or seneh,” a word which ought perhaps 
 to be retained as the proper name of a thorny 
 shrub common in that district, a species of 
 acacia according to Dr Stanley. ‘The name is 
 very ancient, in Coptic Sheno; it is found in 
 papyri of the 19th dynasty and in inscriptions 
 quoted by Brugsch, ‘D. H.’ p. 1397, who 
 translates it Dorn-Acacia, thorny acacia. ‘The 
 use of the article is peculiar: it seems to mean 
 that bush of which Moses must have spoken 
 frequently to the Israelites. 
 
 4. the Lord saw] ‘The interchange of the 
 two divine names is to be observed ; Jehovah 
 saw, God called. 
 
 5. put off thy shoes] The reverence due to 
 holy places thus rests on God’s own command. 
 The custom itself is well known from the 
 observances of the Temple, it was almost 
 universally adopted by the ancients, and is 
 retained in the East. 
 
 holy ground| ‘This passage is almost con- 
 clusive against the assumption that the place 
 was previously a sanctuary. Moses knew no- 
 thing of its holiness after some 40 years spent 
 on the Peninsula. It became holy by the 
 presence of God. 
 
 6. Moreover] Literally And. 
 
 thy father| The word seems to be used 
 collectively for the forefathers of Moses; it 
 may, however, refer specially to Abraham, the 
 father of the faithful; with whom the covenant 
 was first made. 
 
 Our Saviour adduces the passage as a proof 
 that the doctrine of the resurrection was 
 taught in the Old Testament, and he calls this 
 
to 
 
 ta 
 
 the God of: Isaac, and the God of 
 Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for 
 he was afraid to look upon God. 
 
 7 4 And the Lorp said, I have 
 surely seen the affliction of my people 
 which are in Egypt, and have heard 
 their cry by reason of their task- 
 masters; for I know their sorrows; 
 
 8 And I am come down to deliver 
 them out of the hand of the Egyptians, 
 and to bring them up out of that land 
 unto a good land and a large, unto a 
 land flowing with milk and honey; 
 unto the place of the Canaanites, and 
 the Hittites, and the Amorites, and 
 the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and 
 the Jebusites. 
 
 book the book of Moses (see marg.), two 
 points to be borne in mind by readers of the 
 Pentateuch. 
 
 7. taskmasters| A different word from 
 that used in ch. i. 11. It means oppressors. 
 
 I know] ‘The expression implies a personal 
 feeling, tenderness, and compassion. 
 
 8. a good land, &c.| The natural richness 
 of Palestine, the variety and excellence of its 
 productions, are attested by all ancient writers, 
 whose descriptions are strongly in contrast 
 with those of later travellers. ‘The expression 
 ‘‘flowing with milk and honey” is used pro- 
 verbially by Greek poets. Knobel assumes 
 very unnecessarily, that the honey of wine, not 
 of bees, is meant; Euripides, describing a 
 paradisiacal state, says: ‘‘It flows with milk, 
 it flows with the honey of bees,” ‘Bacche,’ 1. 
 142. On the abundance of honey in Palestine 
 see Tristram, ‘Land of Israel,’ p. 88. 
 
 the place of the Canaanites| ‘This is the first 
 passage in this book where the enumeration, 
 so often repeated, of the nations then in pos- 
 session of Palestine,.is given. Moses was to 
 learn at once the extent of the promise, and 
 the greatness of the enterprise. In Egypt, 
 the forces, situation, and character of these 
 nations were then well known. Aahmes I. 
 had invaded the south of Palestine in his 
 pursuit of the Shasous; Thotmes I. had 
 traversed the whole land on his campaign in 
 Syria and Mesopotamia; representations of 
 Canaanites, of the Cheta, identified by most 
 Egyptologers with the Hittites, are common 
 on monuments of the 18th and roth dynas- 
 ties, and give a strong impression of their 
 civilization, riches, and especially of their 
 knowledge of the arts of war. In this 
 passage, the more general designations come 
 first—‘‘Canaanites” probably includes all the 
 races; the Hittites, who had great numbers of 
 chariots (892 were taken from them by Thot- 
 
 [AOR BABY 
 
 INTs 
 9 Now therefore, behold, the cry 
 
 of the children of Israel is come unto 
 me: and I have also seen the oppres- 
 sion wherewith the Egyptians oppress 
 them. 
 
 10 Come now therefore, and I will 
 send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou 
 mayest bring forth my people the 
 children of Israel out of Egypt. 
 
 11 @ And Moses said unto God, 
 Who am I, that I should go unto 
 Pharaoh, and that I should bring 
 forth the children of Israel out of 
 Egypt? 
 
 12 And he said, Certainly I will 
 be with thee; and this shall bea token 
 unto thee, that I have sent thee: 
 
 [v. 7—12. 
 
 mes III. in one battle), occupied the plains; 
 the Amorites were chiefly mountaineers, but 
 gave their name to the whole country in 
 Egyptian inscriptions; the name Perizzites 
 probably denotes the dwellers in scattered 
 villages, the half-nomad population; the Hi- 
 vites, a comparatively unwarlike, but influential 
 people, held 4 cities in Palestine proper, but 
 
 their main body dwelt in the north-western dis-. 
 
 trict, from Hermon to Hamath (see Josh. xi. 3, 
 and Judg. iii. 3); the Jebusites at that time 
 appear to have occupied Jerusalem and the 
 adjoining district. Soon after their expulsion 
 by Joshua, they seem to have recovered pos- 
 session of part of Jerusalem, probably Mount 
 Zion, and to have retained it until the time of 
 David. 
 
 11. Who am I] The change in the character 
 of Moses since his first attempt, is strongly 
 marked by these words, which, however, 
 indicate humility, not fear. Amongthegrounds 
 which he alleges for his hesitation, in no in- 
 stance is there any allusion to personal danger; 
 what he feared was failure owing te incom- 
 petency, especially in the power of expres- 
 sion. ‘This shrinking from self-assertion is the 
 quality which seems to be specially intimated 
 by the word rendered ‘‘meek” in Numbers 
 ch, Xi. 3. 
 
 12. a token unto thee] Or the sign. This 
 passage illustrates a peculiar use of the word. 
 It generally means any act, whether super- 
 natural or not, which is made the pledge of 
 some future event; but sometimes, as un- 
 doubtedly in this place, it means a declaration 
 or promise of God, which rests absolutely on 
 His word, and demands faith. The pro- 
 mise that God would have the people serve 
 Him in that place was an assurance, if fully 
 believed, that all intervening obstacles would 
 be removed by His power. 
 
v. 13—-18.] 
 
 When thou hast brought forth the 
 people out of Egypt, ye shall serve 
 God upon this mountain. 
 
 13 And Moses said unto God, Be- 
 hold, when I come unto the children 
 of Israel, and shall say unto them, 
 The God of your fathers hath sent 
 me unto you; and they shall say to 
 me, What is his name? what shall I 
 say unto them? 
 
 14 And God said unto Moses, I 
 AM THAT I AM: and he said, 
 Thus shalt thou say unto the children 
 of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto 
 you. 
 
 15 And God said moreover unto 
 Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the 
 children of Israel, The Lorp God of 
 your fathers, the God of Abraham, 
 the God of Isaac, and the God of Ja- 
 
 cob, hath sent me unto you: this zs 
 
 EXOD UrSit P11: 
 
 my name for ever, and this zs my 
 memorial unto all generations. 
 
 16 Go, and gather the elders of 
 Israel together, and say unto them, 
 The Lorp God of your fathers, the 
 God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of 
 Jacob, appeared unto me, saying, I 
 have surely visited you, and seen that 
 which is done to you in Egypt: 
 
 17 And I have said, I will bring 
 you up out of the affliction of Egypt 
 unto the land of the Canaanites, and 
 the Hittites, and the Amorites, and 
 the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and 
 the Jebusites, unto a land flowing with 
 milk and honey. 
 
 18 And they shall hearken to thy 
 voice: and thou shalt come, thou and 
 the elders of Israel, unto the king of 
 Egypt, and ye shall say unto him, 
 The Lorp God of the Hebrews hath 
 
 13. What is his name| The meaning of 
 this question is evidently: By which name 
 shall I tell them the promise is confirmed? 
 Each name of the Deity represented some 
 aspect or manifestation of His attributes. El, 
 Elohim, or Shaddai would speak of majesty, or 
 might; either would probably have sufficed 
 for Moses, but he would not use any one of 
 them without God’s special permission. What 
 he needed was not a new name, but direction 
 to use that Name which weuld bear in itself 
 a pledge of accomplishment. It is not pro- 
 bable that Moses alluded to the multitudinous 
 gods of Egypt; but he was familiar with the 
 Egyptian habit of choosing from their many 
 names that which bore specially upon the wants 
 - and circumstances of their worshippers (see 
 especially the formule in the ‘Papyrus ma- 
 gique d’ Harris,’ Chabas), and this may possi- 
 bly have suggested the question which he was 
 of course aware would be the first his own 
 people would expect him to answer. 
 
 14. I am that I am] That is “IT am 
 what I am.” The words express absolute, 
 and therefore unchanging and eternal Being. 
 So they are understood by ancient and modern 
 interpreters (On the meaning and use of the 
 name see the General Introduction). To 
 Moses and the Israelites this was an explana- 
 tion of the name Jehovah, which had been 
 known from the beginning, but of which pro- 
 bably the meaning, certainly the full import, 
 was not comprehended. ‘The word ‘I am” 
 in Hebrew is equivalent in meaning to Jehovah, 
 and differs from it very slightly in form. This 
 
 is much obscured by our substitution of 
 Lord for Jehovah. ‘The name, which Moses 
 was thus commissioned to use, was at once 
 new and old; old in its connection with 
 previous revelations; new in its full interpre- 
 tation, and in its bearing upon the covenant 
 of which Moses was the destined mediator. 
 
 15. The Lorp God] In this passage it is 
 of great importance to keep the divine name 
 Jehovah God of your fathers, God 
 of Abraham, God of Isaac, and God 
 of Jacob. It corresponds exactly to the pre- 
 ceding verse, the words I am and Jehovah 
 being equivalent. This enables us to omit 
 the article before ‘‘God,” which is not in the 
 Hebrew, and may be misunderstood, as though 
 distinguishing Jehovah from other gods. The 
 name met all the requirements of Moses, in- 
 volving a twofold pledge of accomplishment ; 
 the pledges of ancient benefits and of a new 
 manifestation. 
 
 name...memorial] The name signifies that 
 by which God makes himself known, the 
 memorial that by which His people worship 
 Him; or as Bishop Wordsworth, following 
 Keil, expresses it ‘‘the name declares the 
 objective manifestation of the Divine Nature ; 
 the memorial, the subjective recognition by 
 man.” 
 
 18. hath met with us] This translation 
 has been questioned, but it is now generally 
 adopted. ‘The Ancient Versions generally 
 have *‘ hath commanded or called us.” 
 
 263: 
 
1 Or, but 
 
 by strong 
 
 hand. 
 
 met with us: and now let us go, we 
 beseech thee, three days’ journey into 
 the wilderness, that we may sacrifice 
 to the Lorp our God. 
 
 1g 4 And I am sure that the king 
 of Egypt will not let you go, 'no, not 
 by a mighty hand. 
 
 20 And I will stretch out my hand, 
 and smite Egypt with all my wonders 
 which I will do in the midst thereof: 
 and after that he will let you go. 
 
 three days’ journey| i.e. A journey which 
 would occupy three days in going and re- 
 turning. ‘The request which the Israelites 
 were instructed to make was therefore most 
 probably not a permission to go beyond the 
 frontier, but into the part of the desert adjoin- 
 ing Goshen. In this there was no deception. 
 The Israelites were to ask what could not 
 reasonably be refused, being a demand quite in 
 accordance with Egyptian customs. ‘The re- 
 fusal of Pharaoh and his subsequent proceed- 
 ings led to the accomplishment of the ultimate 
 purpose of God, which was revealed to Moses 
 at once, since without it his mission would 
 have had no adequate object. It is important 
 to observe that the first request which Pharaoh 
 rejected could have been granted without any 
 damage to Egypt, or any risk of the Israelites 
 passing the strongly fortified frontier. The 
 point is well drawn out by M. de Quatremere. 
 See ‘Mémoires de |’ Académie des Inscriptions 
 et Belles Lettres,’ Vol. x1x. 
 
 19. And Iam sure| Or, I know. 
 
 no, not] ‘The marginal rendering ‘‘but by 
 a mighty hand” probably gives the true mean- 
 ing, but the construction presents some diffi- 
 culty. The LXX. have édy yn, unless. Keil 
 renders the phrase ‘‘not even by a mighty 
 hand,” and explains it to mean Pharaoh will 
 not let the people go even when severely 
 smitten. This is a satisfactory explanation, 
 and is borne out by the history; even after 
 the 8th plague, we read ‘‘ Pharaoh would not 
 let them go.” 
 
 22. shall borrow] or shall ask. (See 
 Note at the end of the Chapter.) Our trans- 
 lation is unfortunate. The word is exceed- 
 ingly common, and always means ask or de- 
 mand. Setting aside this passage no proof or 
 justification of the rendering ‘‘ borrow” is ad- 
 duced, except x Sam. 1.28, and 2 Kingsvi.s5. In 
 the former passage the meaning is ‘‘asked,” 
 and granted, not ‘‘borrowed.” In the latter the 
 meaning ‘‘borrowed” is true, but secondary. 
 Of course ‘‘asked.” may apply either to a gift or 
 a loan, a sense to be determined by the context, 
 as in Exod. xxii. 14, where the construction 
 is different. In this case there is no indication 
 
 12>, COND AULT Sal BU 
 
 [v. 19—22. 
 
 21 And I will give this people fa- 
 vour in the sight of the Egyptians: 
 and it shall come to pass, that, when 
 ye go, ye shall not go empty: 
 
 22, “But every woman shall borrow @ chap, oy, 
 of her neighbour, and of her that 2 ©1235. 
 
 sojourneth in her house, jewels of 
 silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment: 
 and ye shall put them upon your sons, 
 
 and upon your daughters; and ye shall if 
 Egypt. 
 
 spoil 'the Egyptians. 
 
 that the jewels which were demanded when the 
 final departure of the Israelites was settled, 
 and strongly urged upon their acceptance by 
 the Egyptians, were expected to be returned. 
 The Egyptians had made the people serve 
 ‘¢with rigour, in all manner of service in the 
 fields,” and the Israelites when about to leave 
 the country for ever were to ask, or claim the 
 jewels as a just, though very inadequate remune- 
 ration for services which had made ‘‘their lives 
 bitter.” The Egyptians doubtless would have 
 refused had not their feelings towards Moses 
 
 (see ch. xi. 3) and the people been changed | 
 
 under God’s influence, by calamities in which 
 they recognized a divine interposition, which 
 also they rightly attributed to the obstinacy of 
 their own king, (see ch. x. 7). “The Hebrew 
 women were to make the demand, and were 
 to make it to women, who would of course 
 be specially moved to compliance by the loss 
 of their children, the fear of a recurrence of 
 calamity, perhaps also by a sense of the fitness 
 of the request in connection with a religious 
 festival. 
 
 jewels] ‘The Hebrew may be rendered more 
 generally ‘‘vessels” or simply ‘‘articles.” (The 
 Vulgate has vasa, the LX X. oxevyn.) But the 
 word probably refers chiefly to trinkets. The 
 ornaments of gold and silver worn at that 
 time by Egyptian women were beautiful and 
 of great value. It is probable that, as at 
 present, husbands invested their earnings in 
 jewels. The wife of a tradesman or of a drago- 
 man is thus often in possession of bracelets and 
 collars of gold which in Europe would indicate 
 wealth or high station. It is to be observed 
 that these ornaments were actually applied to 
 the purpose for which they were probably de- 
 manded, being employed in making the vessels 
 of the sanctuary. 
 
 sojourneth in her house| ‘This indicates a 
 degree of friendly and neighbourly intercourse, 
 which could scarcely be inferred from the 
 preceding narrative, but it is in accordance 
 with several indirect notices, and was a natural 
 result of Jong and peaceable sojourn in the 
 district. ‘The Egyptians did not all necessarily 
 share the feelings of their new king, 
 
v. 1—-8.] 
 
 Br ODUS: IV. 
 
 26 
 
 NOTE on Cuap. Ill. Vv. 22. 
 
 The true translation is important. ‘The 
 word has in fact but one true meaning, ‘ask.’ 
 The ancient Versions take it in this sense. 
 The LXX. has airnoe:, the Vulgate, postu- 
 labit. ‘The Syriac and the Targum use the 
 same word, in the same sense as the Hebrew. 
 Thus too the Samaritan paraphrase, Saadia 
 
 has wonder, which is incorrectly ren- 
 dered in Walton’s Polyglott, mutuabitur. 
 Freytag, ‘Lex. Arab.’ s. v., gives the true 
 sense, rogavit donum, aut petiit dono sibi dari 
 quid. See also the note on c, xii. 36. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Moses’s rod is turned into a serpent. 6 His 
 hand is leprous. 10 He is loth to be sent. 
 14 Aaron is appointed to assist him. 18 
 Moses departeth from Fethro. 21 God’s mes- 
 _ sage to Pharaoh. 24 Zipporah circumceiseth 
 her son. 27 Aaron ts sent to meet Moses. 
 31 The people believeth them. 
 
 ND Moses answered and said, 
 
 But, behold, they will not be- 
 
 lieve me, nor hearken unto my voice : 
 
 for they will say, The Lorp hath not 
 appeared unto thee. 
 
 2 And the Lorp said unto him, 
 What zs that in thine hand? And 
 he said, A rod. 
 
 And he said, Cast it on the 
 ground. And he cast it on the 
 ground, and it became a serpent; 
 and Moses fled from before it. 
 
 4 And the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 Put forth thine hand, and take it by 
 the tail. And he put forth his hand, 
 
 Lal 
 
 Cuap. IV. With this chapter begins the 
 series of miracles which resulted in the de- 
 liverance of Israel. Long intervals of sacred 
 history pass without any notice of miracle; 
 not one, properly speaking, is recorded in con- 
 nection with the previous history of the chil- 
 dren of Jacob; but they cluster around great 
 and critical events, occurring where they are 
 demonstrably necessary. It is clear that un- 
 less a spiritual miracle transcending out- 
 ward marvels had been wrought in the hearts 
 both of the Israelites and of their oppressors, 
 some special manifestations of divine power 
 were indispensable. ‘The first miracle was 
 wrought to remove the first obstacle, viz. the 
 reluctance of Moses, conscious of his own 
 weakness, and of the enormous power with 
 which he would have to contend. ‘The LXX, 
 add, ‘‘ what shall I say unto them?” a pro- 
 bable, but not a necessary reading. 
 
 2. A rod| The word seems to denote 
 the long staff which on Egyptian monuments 
 is borne by men in positions of authority. 
 See Wilkinson, 111. pp. 367 and 386. It was 
 usually made of acacia wood, such as is still 
 
 and caught it, and it became a rod in 
 his hand: 
 
 5 That they may believe that the 
 Lorp God of their fathers, the God 
 of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and 
 the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto 
 thee. 
 
 6 { And the Lorp said further- 
 more unto him, Put now thine hand 
 into thy bosom. And he put his 
 hand into his bosom: and when he 
 took it out, behold, his hand was 
 leprous as snow. 
 
 7 And he said, Put thine hand into 
 thy bosom again. And he put his 
 hand into his bosom again; and pluck- 
 ed it out of his bosom, and, behold, it 
 was turned again as his other flesh. 
 
 8 And it shall come to pass, if they 
 will not believe thee, neither hearken 
 to the voice of the first sign, that they 
 will believe the voice of the latter sign. 
 
 sold for that purpose by the monks of the 
 convent of Mount Sinai. 
 
 3. a serpent] This miracle had a meaning 
 which Moses could not mistake. ‘The serpent 
 was probably the basilisk or Ureus, the Cobra. 
 See Tristram, ‘Nat. Hist.’ p. 271. ‘This was 
 the symbol of royal and divine power on the 
 diadem of every Pharaoh. It was a poisonous 
 snake, as is shown by the flight of Moses and 
 by most passages in which the same word 
 occurs, nahash, derived from hissing. ‘This 
 snake never attacks without first inflating its 
 neck, and then hissing; on the monuments it 
 is always represented with its neck enormously 
 swollen. ‘The conversion of the rod was not 
 merely a portent (répas), it was asign (onpetor), 
 at once a pledge and representation of victory 
 over the king and gods of Egypt. 
 
 6. Jeprous] The instantaneous production 
 and cure of the most malignant and subtle 
 disease known to the Israelites was a sign of 
 their danger if they resisted the command, 
 and of their deliverance if they obeyed it. The 
 infliction and cure were always regarded as 
 special proofs of a divine intervention. 
 
266 
 
 t Heb. 
 shall be 
 and shall 
 
 be. 
 
 t Heb. 
 
 a man of 
 words. 
 
 t Heb. 
 since yes- 
 terday, 
 nor since 
 the third 
 day. 
 
 FOX OAD Goi ave 
 
 g And it shall come to pass, if they 
 will not believe also these two-signs, 
 neither hearken unto thy voice, that 
 thou shalt take of the water of the 
 river, and pour z¢ upon the dry Jand: 
 and the water which thou takest out 
 of the river ‘shall become blood upon 
 the dry Jand. 
 
 10 4 And Moses said unto the 
 Lorp, O my Lord, I am not 'elo- 
 quent, neither ‘heretofore, nor since 
 thou hast spoken unto thy servant: 
 but I am slow of speech, and of a 
 slow tongue. 
 
 tz And the Lorp said unto him, 
 
 Who hath made man’s mouth? or 
 who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or 
 the seeing, or the blind? have not I 
 the Lorp? 
 
 9. shall become] ‘This rendering is prefer- 
 able to that in the margin. 
 
 10. eloquent] Lit. a man of words, as 
 in margin. ‘The expressions which Moses 
 uses do not imply a natural defect or im- 
 pediment, but an inability to speak fluently. 
 ‘Slow of speech,” literally heavy, is specially 
 used of persons speaking a foreign language 
 imperfectly (see Ezek. iii. 5). ‘The double 
 expression slow of speech and of a slow tongue 
 seems to imply a difficulty both in finding 
 words and in giving them utterance, a very 
 natural result of so long a period of a shep- 
 herd’s life, passed in a foreign land, and as 
 such to be counted among the numerous latent 
 coincidences of the narrative. 
 
 since thou hast spoken| ‘This expression 
 seems to imply that some short time had inter- 
 vened between this address and the first com- 
 munication of the divine purpose to Moses, 
 
 12. Compare with this our Lord’s pro- 
 mise to His Apostles; Matt. x. 19, Mark 
 xiii. rx. It applies to both difficulties; ‘be 
 with thy mouth” giving prompt utterance, 
 and ‘‘teach thee” supplying or eliciting the 
 best expression of the right thought. 
 
 13. dnd he said| ‘The reluctance of Moses 
 is a point of great moment. It had a per- 
 manent effect, for it caused the transfer of 
 a most important part of his work to his 
 brother, and its record supplies a strong evi- 
 dence of the Mosaic authorship of this por- 
 tion, attributed by Knobel to the so-called 
 Jehovist. Like every other circumstance in 
 the narrative it is in accordance with the in- 
 ner law of man’s spiritual development, and 
 specially with the character of Moses; but 
 under the circumstances it indicates a weak- 
 ness of faith, such as no late writer would 
 
 [v. 9-—16, 
 
 12 Now therefore go, and I will 
 
 be “with thy mouth, and teach thee ¢ Matt. ro, 
 Ig. 
 Mark 13. 
 
 13 And he said, O my Lord, send, Tuke a 
 
 what thou shalt say. 
 
 I pray thee, by the hand of him whom «. 
 thou 'wilt send. Or 
 
 14 And the anger of the Lorp was 
 kindled against Moses, and he said, Js 
 not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I 
 know that he can speak well. And 
 also, behold, he cometh forth to meet 
 thee: and when he seeth thee, he 
 will be glad in his heart. 
 
 15 And thou shalt speak unto him, 
 and put words in his mouth: and I 
 will be with thy mouth, and with his 
 mouth, and will teach you what ye 
 shall do. | 
 
 16 And he shall be thy spokesman 
 
 have attributed to the greatest of the descend- 
 ants of Abraham, 
 
 send...by the hand| The Hebrew phrase is 
 curt, so to speak, and ungracious; literally 
 ‘‘send I pray by hand, thou wilt send,” 
 i.e. by whomsoever thou wilt; an expression 
 which has scarcely a precedent and which may 
 serve to illustrate Moses’ own account of his 
 heavy and awkward utterance: cf. Note on 
 Numb, xiv. 13—17. 
 
 14. anger| ‘This proves that the words of 
 Moses indicated more than a consciousness 
 of infirmity; somewhat of the vehemence and 
 stubbornness, characteristic failings of strong, 
 concentrated natures, which had previously 
 been displayed in the slaying of the Egyptian. 
 
 Aaron] This is the first mention of Aaron. 
 The exact meaning of the words ‘the can 
 speak well,” lit. ‘‘speaking he can speak,” has 
 been questioned, but they probably imply that 
 Aaron had both the power and will to speak. 
 Aaron is here called ‘‘the Levite,” with refer- 
 ence, it may be, to the future consecration 
 of this tribe; but not, as Knobel assumes, 
 as though at that time the office and duties of 
 the priesthood were assigned to him. 
 
 he cometh forth] i.e. is on the eve of setting 
 forth. ‘The Hebrew does not imply that 
 Aaron was already on the way, but that he 
 had the intention of going to his brother, pro- 
 bably because the enemies of Moses were now 
 dead, see v. 19. ‘The divine intimation was 
 given afterwards, v. 27; it told Aaron where 
 his brother was to be found. ‘The expression 
 ‘¢elad in his heart” should be noted as one of 
 many indications of the divine sympathy with 
 strong and pure natural affections. 
 
 15. thou shalt speak} Moses thus retains 
 his position as ‘‘mediator;” the word comes - 
 to him first, he transmits it to his brother. 
 
 shouldest. 
 
Pp: 7. 
 
 v. 17—22.] 
 
 unto the people: and he shall be, 
 even he shall be to thee instead of a 
 mouth, and “thou shalt be to him in- 
 stead of God. 
 
 17 And thou shalt take this rod in 
 thine hand, wherewith thou shalt do 
 signs. 
 
 18 @ And Moses went and return- 
 ed to ‘Jethro his father in law, and 
 said unto him, Let me go, I pray 
 thee, and return unto my brethren 
 which are in Egypt, and see whether 
 they be yet alive. And Jethro said 
 to Moses, Go in peace. 
 
 1g And the Lorp said unto Moses 
 in Midian, Go, return into Egypt: 
 
 16. instead of a mouth| We may bear in 
 mind Aaron’s unbroken habitude of speak- 
 ing Hebrew and his probable familiarity with 
 Egyptian. ‘The Arabic translator (Saadia) 
 uses the word tarjaman, i.e. dragoman, inter- 
 preter. Thus also the Syriac and the Targum. 
 
 instead of God| The word God is used 
 of persons who represent the Deity, as kings, 
 or judges, and it is understood in this sense 
 by the Targumist and Saadia: ‘‘‘Thou shalt 
 be to him a master.” 
 
 18. Jethro] In the Hebrew Jether, see 
 note on ch. rr. Moses says nothing of his 
 divine mission to Jethro; it was a secret 
 thing between him and God. 
 
 19. in Midian] ‘The LXX. insert before 
 this verse ‘‘but after those many days the 
 king of Egypt died.” Egli, l.c., holds this 
 to be the ancient reading, but it was probably 
 introduced to explain the following state- 
 ment, which is clear without it. ‘There was 
 apparently some delay on the part of Moses, 
 who did not set out until he received a distinct 
 assurance that all his enemies were removed. 
 Such notices would never have occurred to a 
 later writer, nor could they have originated in 
 popular impressions. ‘They show moreover 
 how entirely Moses acted under an influence 
 overruling the feelings, in which some would 
 find the key to his acts. 
 
 20. an ass] Lit. ‘‘the ass,” which ac- 
 cording to Hebrew idiom means that he set 
 them upon asses, not upon one ass, which 
 would imply that they were both infants. 
 This is the first notice of other sons besides 
 Gershom. 
 
 the rod of God] ‘The reference to the miracle 
 recorded in v. 2, and to the express com- 
 mand in v. 17, is so obvious that it would 
 be unnecessary to point it out but for the 
 strange statement (Knobel) that the rod is here 
 first mentioned. ‘The staff of Moses was con- 
 secrated by the miracle and became the rod of 
 God. 
 
 ees up Oss UV, 
 
 iS) 
 
 for all the men are dead which sought 
 thy life. 
 
 20 And Moses took his wife and 
 his sons, and set them upon an ass, 
 and he returned to the land of Egypt: 
 and Moses took the rod of God in his 
 hand. 
 
 21 And the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 When thou goest to return into Egypt, 
 see that thou do all those wonders be- 
 fore Pharaoh, which I have put in 
 thine hand: but I will harden his heart, 
 that he shall not let the people go. 
 
 22 And thou shalt say unto Pha- 
 raoh, Thus saith the Lorp, Israel 7s 
 my son, even my firstborn: 
 
 21. see that thou do, &c.| The Hebrew 
 has, See all the wonders which I have put 
 into thy hand, and do them before Pharaoh, 
 Moses is called upon to consider the signs and 
 to be prepared to produce them. ‘The con- 
 struction however is not certain; and the old 
 Versions for the most part agree with our 
 Authorised Version, which gives the general 
 sense. 
 
 I will harden| Calamities which do not 
 subdue the heart harden it; and the effects of 
 God’s judgments being foreknown are willed 
 by Him. We should not therefore adopt a 
 forced interpretation of this expression in order 
 to explain away its apparent harshness. ‘The 
 hardening itself is judicial, and just, when it is 
 a consequence of previously formed habits ; in 
 the case of Pharaoh it was at once a righteous 
 judgment, and a natural result of a long series 
 of oppressions and cruelties. ‘Theodoret thus 
 deals with the question: ‘‘’The sun by the 
 action of heat makes wax moist, and mud dry, 
 hardening the one while it softens the other, by 
 the same operation producing exactly opposite 
 results; thus from the long-suffering of God 
 some derive benefit and others harm, some are 
 softened while others are hardened.” ‘Quest. 
 xi. in Exod.’ The reason why the action of 
 God rather than the character of Pharaoh is 
 dwelt on in this passage would seem to be 
 that it was necessary to sustain the spirit of 
 Moses and the people during the process of 
 events, which they were thus taught were 
 altogether foreseen and predetermined by God. 
 
 22. my firstborn] ‘The expression would 
 be perfectly intelligible to Pharaoh, whose 
 official designation was Si Ra, son of Ra. In 
 numberless inscriptions the Pharaohs are styled 
 ‘own sons” or ‘‘beloved sons” of the deity. 
 It is here applied for the first time to Israel ; 
 and as we learn from v. 23, emphatically in 
 antithesis to Pharaoh’s own firstborn, ‘The 
 menace however was not uttered until it was 
 called forth by Pharaoh’s sin, See ch. xi. 5, 
 
 OV 
 
268 
 
 I Or, 
 kntfe. 
 
 t Heb. 
 made tt 
 touch. 
 
 23 And I say unto thee, Let my 
 son go, that he may serve me: and if 
 thou refuse to let him go, behold, I 
 will slay thy son, even thy firstborn. 
 
 24 4 And it came to pass by the 
 way in the inn, that the Lorp met 
 him, and sought to kill him. 
 
 25 Then Zipporah took a sharp 
 "stone, and cut off the foreskin of her 
 son, and ‘cast zt at his feet, and said, 
 Surely a bloody husband art thou to 
 
 me. 
 
 24. in the inn] Or ‘‘resting place,” it 
 probably does not mean a building, but 
 the place where they rested for the night, 
 whether under a tent, or in the open air. The 
 khans or caravanserais, now common in the 
 East, appear to have been unknown to the 
 ancient Israelites and Egyptians. 
 
 met him, and sought to kill him] ‘The ex- 
 pression is obscure, but is understood to 
 mean that Moses was attacked by a sudden 
 and dangerous illness, which he knew was 
 inflicted by God. ‘The word ‘sought to kill’ 
 implies that the sickness, whatever might be 
 its nature, was one which threatened death 
 had it not been averted by a timely act. We 
 are not told for what cause the visitation 
 came; but from the context it may be inferred 
 that it was because Moses had neglected the 
 duty of an Israelite and had not circumcised 
 his son. From the words of Zipporah it is 
 evident that she believed the illness of Moses 
 was to be thus accounted for; the delay was 
 probably owing to her own not unnatural re- 
 pugnance to a rite, which though practised 
 by the Egyptians under the rgth dynasty, and 
 perhaps earlier, was not adopted generally in 
 the East, even by the descendants of Abraham 
 and Keturah. Moses appears to have been 
 utterly prostrate and unable to perform the 
 rite himself. 
 
 25. sharp stone] Not ‘‘knife,” as in the 
 margin. Zipporah used a piece of flint, in 
 accordance with the usage of the patriarchs. 
 The Egyptians never used bronze or steel in 
 the preparation of mummies because stone 
 was regarded as a purer and more sacred 
 material than metal, See Wilkinson, Vol. II. 
 p. 164; and M. de Rougemont, ‘Age du 
 Bronze,’ p. 152. 
 
 cast it at his feet) ‘The Hebrew is ob- 
 scure, but the Authorised Version probably 
 gives the true meaning. Zipporah threw it 
 at the feet of Moses, not of her son, as some 
 commentators suppose; showing at once her 
 abhorrence of the rite, and her feeling that by 
 it she had saved her husband’s life. 
 
 a bloody husband| Lit. ‘‘A husband of 
 blood;” or ‘‘bloods:” the plural form signifies 
 
 BOL) OS abe 
 
 [v. 23—29.. 
 
 26 So he let him go: then she said, 
 A bloody husband thou art, because of 
 the circumcision. 
 
 27 4 And the Lorp said to Aaron, 
 Go into the wilderness to meet Mo- 
 ses. And he went, and met him in 
 the mount of God, and kissed him. 
 
 28 And Moses told Aaron all the 
 words of the Lorp who had sent 
 him, and all the signs which he had 
 commanded him. 
 
 29 § And Moses and Aaron went 
 
 effusion of blood; the word (jNNM) rendered 
 husband (as in Psalm xix. 5, bridegroom) in- 
 cludes all relations by marriage; see note at 
 the end of c.ii. The meaning is, the marriage 
 bond between us is now sealed by blood. In the 
 next verse Zipporah repeats the expression, 
 as though she would say, thou art bound to 
 me by a second covenant of which this bloody 
 rite is the sign and pledge. By performing it 
 Zipporah had recovered her husband; his life 
 was purchased for her by the blood of her 
 child. See the remarks of Hooker, ‘E. P.’ v. 
 62. The Targum Onk. gives a paraphrase, 
 ‘‘ had it not been for the blood of this circum- 
 cision my husband had been condemned to 
 death.” This appears to be the true explanation 
 of a very obscure passage ; other interpretations, 
 which make the words refer to the child, or 
 to the Angel of the Covenant, are generally 
 admitted to be untenable. 
 
 26. So he let him go] i.e. God withdrew 
 His visitation from Moses. ‘The Hebrew 
 allows no other interpretation. 
 
 We learn from ch. xviii. 2, that Moses sent 
 Zipporah and her children back to Jethro 
 before he went to Egypt. It was probably on 
 this occasion. ‘The journey would have been 
 delayed had he waited for the healing of the 
 chiid. 
 
 27. And the Lorp said] Seev.14. Aaron 
 now receives direct intimation where he is to 
 meet his brother. He might otherwise have 
 undertaken a long and fruitless journey to 
 the residence of Jethro. 
 
 in the mount of God] Horeb lies on the 
 direct route from Sherm to Egypt; this pas- 
 sage is therefore in favour of the supposition 
 that Jethro’s residence was on the west of the 
 gulf. See note on c. ii. 
 
 28. who had sent him] The meaning is, 
 probably, ‘‘which God had charged him to 
 do.” ‘Thus the Vulgate, LX X., Knobel, and 
 other commentators; but it is not necessary 
 to alter the translation, which is literal and 
 supported by Rosenmiiller, who renders it, 
 ‘¢qui eum miserat.” 
 
v. 30—4. | 
 
 and gathered together all the elders of 
 the children of Israel: 
 
 30 And Aaren spake all the words 
 which the Lorp had spoken unto 
 Moses, and did the signs in the sight 
 of the people. 
 
 31 And the people believed: and 
 when they heard that the Lorp had 
 visited the children of Israel, and that 
 he had looked upon their affliction, 
 then they bowed their heads and wor- 
 shipped. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 1 Pharaoh chideth Moses and Aaron for their 
 
 message. 5 Heincreaseth the Israelites’ task. 
 15 He checketh their complaints. 20 They 
 cry out upon Moses and Aaron, 22 Moses 
 
 complaineth to God. 
 
 29. all the elders} ‘The Israelites retained 
 their own national organization; their affairs 
 were administered by their own elders, 
 
 $1. the people| ‘This implies that the elders 
 called a public assembly to hear the message 
 brought by Moses and Aaron. 
 
 and worshipped| ‘There is no reason to 
 doubt that this act of worship was addressed 
 to God, not to Moses and Aaron. It is im- 
 portant to remark that in this narrative there 
 is no indication of ignorance of the history 
 of the patriarchs, or of abandonment of the 
 worship of God, sometimes attributed to the 
 Israelites. 
 
 Cuap. V. 1. Pharaoh] This king, pro- 
 bably (see Appendix) Thotmes II. the great 
 grandson of Aahmes, the original persecutor 
 of the Israelites, must have been resident at this 
 time in a city of lower Egypt, situate on the 
 Nile. It could not therefore have been Helio- 
 polis, and we have to choose between Memphis 
 and ‘Tanis; and there can be little doubt that 
 most of the events which follow occurred at 
 the latter city, the Zoan of Scripture. The 
 notice in Psalm Ixxviil. 12, 43, is admitted by 
 all critics to be of great weight, and all the 
 circumstances confirm it. See on ix. 31 and 
 on ii. 5. Tanis was a very large city, and 
 strongly fortified. ‘The remains of buildings 
 and the obelisks are numerous; they bear for 
 the most part the name of Rameses II.; but 
 it was the place of rendezvous for the armies 
 of the Delta, and an imperial city in the rath 
 dynasty; it is identified by M. de Rougé with 
 Avaris the capital of the Hyksos, who pro- 
 bably gave it its Hebrew name; both Avaris 
 and Zoan mean ‘‘going out.” This Pharaoh 
 had waged a successful war in the beginning 
 of his reign against the Shasous, the nomad 
 tribes of the adjoining district, and his resi- 
 
 Be OUs. iy. Vv. 
 
 ND afterward Moses and Aaron 
 went in, and told Pharaoh, 
 Thus saith the Lorp God of Israel, 
 Let my people go, that they may hold 
 a feast unto me in the wilderness. 
 
 2 And Pharaoh said, Who 7s the 
 Lorp, that I should obey his voice to 
 let Israel go? I know not the Lorn, 
 neither will I let Israel go. 
 
 Leal 
 
 3 And they said, * The God of the @ chap. 3. 
 
 Hebrews hath met with us: let us go, 
 we pray thee, three days’ journey 
 into the desert, and sacrifice unto 
 the Lorp our God; lest he fall upon 
 us with pestilence, or with the 
 sword. 
 
 4 And the king of Egypt said unto 
 
 dence in the north-west of Egypt would be 
 of importance at that time. 
 
 the Lorp God] ‘This version rather obscures 
 the meaning; Jehovah God of Israel 
 demanded the services of his people. ‘The 
 demand according to the general views of 
 the heathens was just and natural; the Israel- 
 ites could not offer the necessary sacrifices in 
 the presence of Egyptians. 
 
 2. I know not the Lorp| ‘This may mean 
 either that Pharaoh had not heard of Jehovah, 
 or that he did not recognize Him as a God. 
 The former is possible, for though the name 
 was ancient, it was apparently less used by 
 the Israelites than other designations of God. 
 The Targum thus paraphrases: ‘‘the name 
 of Jah has not been revealed to me.” 
 
 3. three days’ journey| ‘This would not 
 suffice for the journey to the ‘‘ Mountain 
 of God.” See note on ili. 18. All that Moses 
 was instructed to ask for was permission to 
 go into a part of the desert where the people 
 might offer sacrifices without interruption 
 from the Egyptians; and that might be found 
 on the frontiers of Egypt, or, at least, in a 
 district commanded by the king’s army. It 
 is evident from Pharaoh’s answer that he did 
 not see in the request any indication of an 
 intention to escape from Egypt. Ewald (Vol. 
 II. pp. 84, 85) recognizes the reasonableness 
 and modesty of this demand, which he re- 
 presents as a manifest proof that the sober 
 and noble spirit of prophecy in its best age 
 has interpenetrated the narrative; words 
 which do but express the old truth that the 
 transaction and record bear equally the marks 
 of divine governance and inspiration. 
 
 with pestilence, or with the sword| ‘This 
 notice is important as shewing that the plague 
 was well known to the ancient Egyptians. It 
 
them, Wherefore do ye, Moses and 
 Aaron, let the people from their 
 works? get you unto your burdens. 
 
 5 And Pharaoh said, Behold, the 
 people of the land now are many, and 
 ye make them rest from their burdens. 
 
 6 And Pharaoh commanded the 
 same day the taskmasters of the 
 people, and their officers, saying, 
 
 7 Ye shall no more give the people 
 straw to make brick, as heretofore: 
 let them go and gather straw for 
 themselves. 
 
 8 And the tale of the bricks, which 
 they did make heretofore, ye shall 
 lay upon them; ye shall not diminish 
 ought thereof: for they de idle; there- 
 fore they cry, saying, Let us go and 
 sacrifice to our God. 
 
 was probably less common than at present 
 under the ancient Pharaohs, who bestowed 
 great care on the irrigation and drainage of 
 the country, but there are other indications of 
 its ravages. See Chabas, ‘Mél. Eg.’ I. p. 4o. 
 The reference to the sword is equally natural, 
 since the Israelites occupied the eastern dis- 
 trict, which was frequently disturbed by the 
 neighbouring Shasous. See note on v, I. 
 
 6. the taskmasters| ‘This word, which 
 means ‘‘exactors” or ‘‘oppressors,” desig- 
 nates the Egyptian overseers, who were sub- 
 ordinate to the officers called ‘‘taskmasters”’ 
 in ch. i. 11, but whose name is different in 
 Hebrew. See note on ch. i. 11, and 14. 
 
 their officers| Or scribes. ‘These were He- 
 brews, appointed by the Egyptian superin- 
 tendents, and responsible to them for the work ; 
 see v.14. The Hebrew name shoter is equiva- 
 lent to ‘‘scribe;”’ and it is probable that persons 
 were chosen who were able to keep accounts 
 in writing. Subordinate officers are frequent- 
 ly represented on Egyptian monuments giving 
 in written accounts to their immediate 
 superiors. Rosellini (11. 3, p. 272) observes 
 that Egyptians made more use of writing on 
 ordinary occasions than modern Europeans. 
 ‘¢Shoterim”’ are often mentioned in the Old 
 Testament, generally in connection with 
 judges or leaders, by whom they were em- 
 ployed to transmit orders to the people and 
 superintend the execution. It is evident how 
 much this measure must have advanced the 
 organization of the Israelites, and prepared 
 them for their departure. See Note at the 
 end of the Chapter. 
 
 7. straw] Some of the most ancient build- 
 ings in Egypt were constructed of bricks 
 not burned, but dried in the sun; they were 
 
 EEX ODS AVN 
 
 [v. 5—r3. 
 
 g ‘Let there more work be laid { Heb, : 
 upon the men, that they may labour wor a. 
 
 therein; and let them not regard vain 742%, 
 words. men. 
 
 10 @ And the taskmasters of the 
 people went out, and their officers, 
 and they spake to the people, saying, 
 
 Thus saith Pharaoh, I will not give 
 you straw. 
 
 11 Go ye, get you straw where ye 
 can find it: yet not ought of your 
 work shall be diminished. 
 
 12 So the people were scattered 
 abroad throughout all the land of 
 Egypt to gather stubble instead of 
 straw. 
 
 13 And the taskmasters hasted ,,,. 
 them, saying, Fulfil your works, ‘your a matter 
 daily tasks, as when there was straw. pA | 
 
 made of clay, or more commonly of mud, 
 mixed with straw chopped into small pieces. 
 Baked bricks are seldom found in ruins more 
 ancient than the Exodus, never, according to 
 Sir G. Wilkinson, (see Quarterly Review, 
 1859, April, p. 421), but there is a specimen 
 in the British Museum belonging to the reign 
 of ‘Thotmosis III. An immense quantity of 
 straw must have been wanted for the works on 
 which the Israelites were engaged, and their 
 labours must have been more than doubled by 
 this requisition. In a papyrus of the roth 
 dynasty (‘Anast.’ Iv. 12, 16) the writer 
 complains: ‘‘I have no one to help me in 
 making bricks, no straw.” ‘The expression 
 at that time was evidently proverbial, whether 
 or not as a reminiscence of the Israelites may 
 be questioned, but it shows the thoroughly 
 Egyptian character of the transaction. 
 
 9. may tabour therein] ‘The LXX. have 
 ‘*‘that they may attend to it and not attend 
 to vain words:” a good and probable reading. 
 
 12. stubble instead of straw] Rather, for 
 the straw. See Note at the end of the 
 Chapter. The Israelites had to go into the 
 fields after the reaping, was done, to gather 
 
 ‘the stubble left by the reapers, who then, as 
 
 at present in Egypt, cut the stalks close to the 
 ears. ‘They had then to chop it into morsels 
 of straw before it could be mixed with the 
 clay: see the previous note. ‘This implies that 
 some time must have elapsed before Moses 
 again went to Pharaoh; and it also marks the 
 season of the year, viz. early spring, after the 
 barley or wheat harvest, towards the end of 
 April. ‘Their suffering must have been severe, 
 since at that season the pestilential sand-wind 
 blows over Egypt some so days, hence its 
 name Chamsin. 
 
¥e14—23.| EBXODU SV, 271 
 
 14 And the officers of the children 
 of Israel, which Pharaoh’s taskmas- 
 ters had set over them, were beaten, 
 and demanded, Wherefore have ye not 
 fulfilled your task in making brick both 
 yesterday and to day, as heretofore ? 
 
 15 { Then the officers of the chil- 
 dren of Israel came and cried unto 
 Pharaoh, saying, Wherefore dealest 
 thou thus with thy servants? 
 
 16 There is no straw given unto 
 thy servants, and they say to us, Make 
 brick: and, behold, thy servants are 
 beaten; but the fault zs in thine own 
 people. 
 
 17 But he said, Ye are idle, ye are 
 idle: therefore ye say, Let us go and 
 do sacrifice to the Lorp. 
 
 18 Go therefore now, and work; 
 for there shall no straw be given 
 you, yet shall ye deliver the tale of 
 bricks. 
 
 13. hasted them| See the words of the 
 overseer quoted above on ch. i. 14. In a pas- 
 sage of the papyrus ‘ Anast.’ 111. translated by 
 M. Chabas, ‘Mél. Eg.’ 11. p. 122, twelve 
 labourers employed in the same district are 
 punished for negligence in failing to make up 
 their daily tale of bricks. 
 
 14. Were beaten] ‘The beating of these 
 officers is quite in accordance with Egyptian 
 customs; even natives of rank in civil and 
 military service were subject to severe cor- 
 poral punishments. See note on ch. ii. 11. 
 
 16. the fault is in thine own people] Lit. 
 thy people sin: which may possibly 
 mean thy subjects, z.e. the Israelites, are made 
 guilty and punished: but the Authorised Ver- 
 sion probably gives the true meaning; thus the 
 Vulg., Targ. and Saadia. The LXX. and Syr. 
 have ‘‘thou hast sinned against thy people.” 
 
 17. Ye are idle| The old Egyptian lan- 
 guage abounds in epithets which shew con- 
 tempt for idleness. ‘The charge was equally 
 offensive and ingenious; one which would be 
 readily believed by Egyptians who knew how 
 much public and private labours were impeded 
 _ by festivals and other religious ceremonies. 
 Among the great sins which involved con- 
 
 1g And the officers of the children 
 of Israel did see that they were in evil 
 case, after it was said, Ye shall not 
 minish ought from your bricks of your 
 daily task. 
 
 20 “ And they met Moses and Aa- 
 ron, who stood in the way, as they 
 came forth from Pharaoh: 
 
 21 And they said unto them, The 
 Lorp look upon you, and judge; _be- 
 cause ye have made our savour 'to be? Heb. 
 abhorred in the eyes of Pharaoh, and “*””* 
 in the eyes of his servants, to put a 
 sword in their hand to slay us. 
 
 22 And Moses returned unto the 
 Lorp, and said, Lord, wherefore hast 
 thou so evil entreated this people? 
 why 7s it that thou hast sent me? 
 
 23 For since I came to Pharaoh 
 to speak in thy name, he hath done t Heb. | 
 evil to this people; neither hast thou tou Aast 
 ‘delivered thy people at all. pide 
 
 livered. 
 
 demnation in the final judgment, idleness is 
 twice mentioned ; see funeral ritual in Bunsen’s 
 ‘Egypt,’ ed. 2, Vol. v. pp. 254, 255. 
 
 19. in evil case] ‘They saw plainly that 
 the object of Pharaoh was to find a pretext 
 for further cruelty; probably for cutting off 
 the leaders of the Israelites; see v.21. The 
 effect, however, would be to bring them into 
 closer union and sympathy with the people. 
 
 20. who stood in the way] Or ‘‘waiting 
 to meet them,” z.e. Moses and Aaron stood 
 without the palace to learn the result of the 
 interview. 
 
 21. in the eyes] The change of metaphor 
 shows that the expression was proverbial. 
 Thus an Egyptian of rank complains to the 
 scribe, who writes his history, ‘‘’Thou hast 
 made my name offensive, stinking, to all 
 men.’ Anast.” 443-4) 
 
 23. ‘The earnestness of this remon- 
 strance, and even its approach to irreverence, 
 are quite in keeping with other notices of 
 Moses’ naturally impetuous character, see 
 especially, ch. ili. 13; but such a speech would 
 certainly not have been put into his mouth 
 by a later writer. See note on ch. iv. Io. 
 
 NOTES on Cuwap. V. vv. 6 and 12. 
 
 6. ‘The question whether the DY were 
 Egyptians or Hebrews is important in its 
 bearings on the narrative. ‘The word is com- 
 mon, and always denotes the class of persons 
 
 described in the foot-note. Gesenius finds 
 
 its root in the Arabic hes, he wrote. The 
 LXX. render it rois ypapparevowy: the Syr. 
 s2co, writer or scribe. Thus also the 
 Samaritan version. ‘The Targum Onk. uses 
 the word ND, which is incorrectly rendered 
 
2 
 
 - 
 
 é 
 
 2 
 
 ‘‘exactor” in Walton’s Polyglott. It corre- 
 sponds exactly to shoter, and is applied to 
 the native officers of Israel: see Buxtorf, 
 ‘Lex. Chal.’s.v. Saadia uses a word which 
 Walton renders ‘“exactor;” but its true 
 meaning is ‘‘cognitor, qui suos cognitos 
 habet;” a very apt expression for these 
 Hebrew officials. : 
 
 12. ‘The Hebrew has &), stubble, and rand, 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 I God reneweth his promise by his name 
 FEHOVAH. 14 The genealogy of Reuben, 
 15 of Simeon, 16 of Levi, of whom came 
 Moses and Aaron. 
 
 HEN the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 
 Now shalt thou see what I will 
 do to Pharaoh: for with a strong hand 
 shall he let them go, and with a strong 
 hand shall he drive them out of his 
 land. 
 
 2 And God spake unto Moses, and 
 said unto him, I am 'the Lorn: 
 
 3 And I appeared unto Abraham, 
 unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the 
 name of God Almighty, but by my 
 name JEHOVAH was I not known 
 
 to them. 
 
 CHAP. VI. 1. with a strong hand] Or, 
 by a strong hand, 7.e. compelled by the 
 power of God, manifested in judgments. In 
 the and clause the LX X. have ‘“‘by a stretched 
 out arm:” a probable reading, adopted by 
 Eegli, lc. 
 
 2, 3. ‘There appears to have been an 
 interval of some months between the pre- 
 ceding events and this renewal of the promise 
 to Moses. ‘The oppression in the mean time 
 was not merely driving the people to despera- 
 tion, but’ preparing them by severe labour, 
 varied by hasty wanderings in search of 
 stubble, for the exertions and privations of 
 the wilderness. Hence the formal and solemn 
 character of the announcements in the whole 
 chapter. 
 
 2. Iam the Lorp] See General Introduc- 
 tion, p. 25. ‘The meaning, as is there shewn, 
 seems to be this. I am Jehovah, and I ap- 
 peared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as El 
 Shaddai, but as to my name Jehovah, I was 
 not made known to them. In other words, 
 the full import of that name was not disclosed 
 to them. On the one hand it is scarcely 
 possible to doubt, and it is in fact admitted 
 by most critics, that the sacred name Jehovah 
 was known from very early times; on the 
 
 EXODUS Vil: 
 
 [v. 1—7, 
 
 \ 
 which does not mean instead of, but ‘ for,” 
 
 i.e. to be prepared as J3N, ‘‘ straw chopped 
 small:” stramenta minutim concisa. ‘Thus 
 the ancient versions and ‘Targ.Onk., which is 
 incorrectly translated in Walton. The ety- 
 mology of {2N is doubted; no Semitic root is 
 found. The Egyptian has tebu, chaff. ‘ Pap. 
 Sallier,’ v. 6. Kash also is Egyptian for 
 stubble, or stalk. 
 
 4 And I have also established my 
 covenant with them, to give them the 
 land of Canaan, the land of their pil- 
 grimage, wherein they were strangers. 
 
 5 And I have also heard the groan- 
 ing of the children of Israel) whom 
 the Egyptians keep in bondage; and 
 I have remembered my covenant. 
 
 6 Wherefore say unto the children 
 of Israel, I am the Lorn, and I will 
 bring you out from under the burdens 
 of the Egyptians, and I will rid you 
 out of their bondage, and I will re- 
 deem you with a stretched out arm, 
 and with great judgments : 
 
 7 And I will take you to me for a 
 people, and I will be to you a God: 
 and ye shall know that I am the Lorp 
 
 other, the revelation on Mount Sinai clearly 
 states that the derivation and full meaning 
 of the name were then first declared. On 
 this special occasion it was important or ne- 
 cessary, for the support and encouragement of 
 Moses and the people to whom he gave the 
 announcement, to repeat the declaration as 
 a pledge of the fulfilment of the promises 
 made on the ‘‘ Mountain of God.” 
 
 3. God Almighty| Rather, ‘‘E1 Shaddai,” 
 it is better to keep this as a proper name; the 
 meaning is correctly given in the text. 
 
 4. And I have also| ‘The connection be- 
 tween this and the following verse is marked 
 by the repetition of these words. Two 
 reasons are assigned for the promise, viz. the 
 old covenant with the patriarchs, and the 
 divine compassion for the sufferings of Is- 
 rael. 
 
 6. with a stretched out arm] The figure 
 is common and quite intelligible; it may have 
 struck Moses and the people the more forcibly 
 since they were familiar with the hieroglyphic 
 which represents might ‘by two outstretched 
 arms. On the obelisk at Heliopolis, Moses 
 had been from infancy familiar with the symbol 
 in the official name of Osertasen Racheperka, 
 z.e. Ra is might. 
 
beats.) EXODUS) V1. A 
 your God, which ‘bringeth you out Israel have not hearkened unto me; 
 from under the burdens of the Egyp- how then shall Pharaoh hear me, who 
 tians. am of uncircumcised lips? 
 
 8 And I will bring you in unto 13 And the Lorp spake unto Mo- 
 the land, concerning the which I did ses and unto Aaron, and gave them a 
 eb. ' swear to give it to Abraham, to Isaac, charge unto the children of Israel, and 
 ##™Y and to Jacob; and I will give it you unto Pharaoh king of Egypt, to bring 
 for an heritage: I am the Lorp. the children of Israel out of the land 
 
 g { And Moses spake so unto the of Egypt. 
 children of Israel: but they hearkened 14 {1 These be the heads of their 
 
 dep. not unto Moses for tanguish of spirit, fathers’ houses: “The sons of Reuben ¢ Gen. 46. 
 wrtness, and for cruel bondage. the firstborn of Israel; Hanoch, and Y chron. 
 
 +, strait- 
 
 nS. ro And the Lorp spake unto Mo- Pallu, Hezron, and Carmi: these be + 
 
 ses, saying, 
 
 11 Go in, speak unto Pharaoh king 
 of Egypt, that he let the children of 
 Israel go out of his land. 
 
 12 And Moses spake before the 
 Lorp, saying, Behold, the children of 
 
 8. I am the Lorp| Rather, I the 
 Lord: the word ‘‘am” obscures the con- 
 struction. 
 
 9. they hearkened not) ‘The contrast be- 
 tween the reception of this communication 
 and that recorded in ch. iv. 31, is dwelt upon 
 by some critics as indicating different authors, 
 but it is distinctly accounted for by the change 
 of circumstances. On the former occasion 
 ‘the people were comparatively at ease, accus- 
 tomed to their lot, sufficiently afflicted to long 
 for deliverance, and sufficiently free in spirit 
 to hope for it. 
 
 for anguish] Literally as in the margin, 
 for shortness of spirit; out of breath, 
 as it were, after their cruel disappointment, 
 they were quite absorbed by their misery, 
 unable and unwilling to attend to any fresh 
 communication; an effect which might seem 
 recorded expressly to preclude the notion that 
 the deliverance of Israel was the result of a 
 religious struggle, such as is assumed in some 
 accounts of the transaction. 
 
 11. go out of his land| There is now a 
 change in the demand; the first of a series of 
 changes. Moses is now bidden to demand 
 not a permission for a three days’ journey, 
 which might be within the boundaries of 
 Egypt, but for departure from the land. 
 
 12. uncircumcised lips} An uncircumcised 
 ear is one that does not hear clearly; an uncir- 
 cumcised heart one slow to receive and under- 
 stand warnings; uncircumcised lips, such as 
 cannot speak fluently. Thus LXX., Syr., 
 Targ., &c. There is no ground for assuming 
 a natural defect. See note on ch.iv.10. The 
 
 Vor. 1. 
 
 the families of Reuben. 
 
 15 And the sons of Simeon; Je- x Chron. 
 
 muel, and Jamin, and Ohad, and Ja-* 
 
 chin, and Zohar, and Shaul the son of 
 a Canaanitish woman: these are the 
 families of Simeon. 
 
 recurrence of Moses’ hesitation is natural ; 
 great as was the former trial this was far 
 more severe; yet his words as ever imply 
 fear of failure, not of personal danger. 
 
 13. unto Moses and unto Aaron] The final 
 and formal charge to the two brothers is given, 
 as might be expected, before the plagues are 
 denounced. With this verse begins a new 
 section of the history, and as in the book 
 of Genesis ‘‘there is in every such case a 
 brief repetition of so much of the previous 
 account as is needed to make it an intel- 
 ligible narrative in itself; a peculiarity which 
 extends to the lesser subdivisions also,” Quarry 
 ‘On Genesis,’ p. 322. 
 
 14. These be the heads} We have in the 
 following verses, not a complete genealogy, 
 but a summary account of the family of the 
 two brothers. It has been objected to as out 
 of place, interrupting the narrative, and there- 
 fore probably an interpolation; but, as Rosen- 
 miiller and other unbiassed critics have ob- 
 served, the reason is clear why Moses should 
 have recorded his own genealogy and that of 
 his brother, when they were about to ex- 
 ecute a duty of the highest importance which 
 had been imposed upon them; just then it 
 was right and natural to state, for the satis- 
 faction of Hebrew readers, to whom genea- 
 logical questions were always interesting, the 
 descent and position of the designated leaders 
 of the nation. 
 
 The sons of Reuben| Moses mentions in the 
 first place the families of the elder brothers of 
 Levi, in order to shew the exact position of 
 his own tribe and family. ‘Thus Rashi and 
 Rosenmiiller. 
 
 S 
 
274 
 
 ¢ Numb. 
 
 17- 
 1 Chron. 
 1S 
 
 @ Numb. 
 20m5 7. 
 
 t Chron. 
 i. 
 
 € chap. 2 
 
 16 4 And these are the names of 
 3. the “sons of Levi according to their 
 5. generations; Gershon, and Kohath, 
 and Merari: and the years of the life 
 of Levi were an hundred thirty and 
 seven years. 
 17 The sons of Gershon; Libni, 
 and Shimi, according to their families. 
 18 And the sons of Kohath; Am- 
 ram, and IJzhar, and Hebron, and 
 Uzziel: and the years of the life of 
 Kohath were an hundred thirty and 
 three years, 
 1g And the sons of Merari; Ma- 
 haliand Mushi: these are the families 
 of Levi according to their generations. 
 
 6. 
 
 . 20 And ¢Amram took him Joche- 
 
 Numb, 26, Ded his father’s sister to wife; and she 
 
 59- 
 
 bare him Aaron and Moses: and the 
 years of the life of Amram were an 
 hundred and thirty and seven years. 
 
 16. sons of Levi] ‘Thus Moses shews 
 that of the three great divisions of the tribe, 
 the one to which he and Aaron belonged, and 
 to which the priesthood was afterwards con- 
 fined, was the second, not the first. Again, 
 he does not trace the descent of other families, 
 but passes at once from Kohath, the son of 
 Levi, to the heads of Kohath’s family in his 
 own time. 
 
 the years of the life of Levi| It is usual 
 throughout Genesis in each genealogy to give 
 the age of the chief person in each principal 
 family, and to omit it in the case of secondary 
 families. 
 
 20. Amram] This can scarcely be the 
 same person who is mentioned in v.18; but 
 his descendant and representative in the gene- 
 ration immediately preceding that of Moses. 
 The intervening links are omitted, as is the 
 rule where they are not needed for some 
 special purpose, and do not bear upon the 
 history. Between the death of Amram and 
 the birth of Moses was an interval which 
 can scarcely be brought within the limits 
 assigned by any system of chronology to the 
 sojourn in Egypt. Thus Tiele, quoted by 
 Keil: ‘According to Numbers iii. 27, &c. 
 in the time of Moses the Kohathites were 
 divided into four branches, that of Amram, 
 Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel: their number 
 amounted to 8600 males; of these the Am- 
 ramites were about one fourth, i.e. more 
 than 2000 males. ‘This would be impossible 
 were Amram the son of Kohath identical 
 with Amram the father of Moses. We must 
 therefore admit an omission of several links 
 
 PAOD US avi: 
 
 [v. 1626, 
 
 21 @ And the sons of Izhar; Ko- 
 rah, and Nepheg, and Zithri. 
 
 22, And the sons of Uzziel; Mi- 
 shael, and Elzaphan, and Zithri. 
 
 23 And Aaron took him Elisheba, 
 daughter of Amminadab, sister of 
 Naashon, to wife; and she bare him 
 Nadab, and Abihu, Eleazar, and 
 Ithamar. . 
 
 24 And the sons of Korah; Assir, 
 and Elkanah, and Abiasaph: these are 
 the families of the Korhites. 
 
 25 And Eleazar Aaron’s son took 
 him one of the daughters of Putiel to 
 
 wife; and “she bare him Phinehas: Numb. 
 25. II 
 
 these are the heads of the fathers of 
 the Levites according to their families. 
 26 ‘These are that Aaronand Moses, 
 to whom the Lorp said, Bring out the 
 children of Israel from the land of 
 Egypt according to their armies, 
 
 — 
 
 between the two.” ‘Thus in the genealogy 
 of Ezra (Ezra vii. 3, compared with 1 Chron. 
 Vv. 33—35) five descents are omitted between 
 Azariah the son of Meraioth and Azariah 
 son of Johanan, and several between Ezra 
 himself and Seraiah, who was put to death 
 by Nebuchadnezzar 150 years before the 
 time of Ezra.” 
 
 Jochebed| Here named for the first time, 
 and, as might be expected, not in the general 
 narrative but in a genealogical statement. The 
 name means ‘‘the glory of Jehovah,” one 
 clear instance of the usage of the sacred name 
 before the Exodus. 
 
 father’s sister] ‘This was within the pro- 
 hibited degrees after the law was given, but 
 not previously. 
 
 23. Elisheba| Her brother Naashon was 
 at that time captain of the children of Judah, 
 Num. ii. 3. Theodoret remarks, ris Baot- 
 Aukns Kal Tis iepatikns pvdns thy emiptsiay 
 didacker. ‘Quest. in Exod.’ i.e. (Moses) 
 shews the intermixture of the royal and 
 priestly tribes. 
 
 25. Putiel] This name is remarkable, being 
 compounded. of Puti, or Poti, in Egyptian 
 ‘* devoted to,” and ‘‘ EI,” the Hebrew name 
 of God. See De Vogué, ‘ Inscriptions sémi- 
 tiques,’ p. 125. 
 
 26, 27. ‘This emphatic repetition shews 
 the reason for inserting the genealogy. The 
 names of Moses and Aaron are given twice 
 and in a different order; in the 26th verse 
 probably to mark Aaron as the elder in the 
 genealogy, and in the 27th to denote the 
 leadership of Moses. 
 
v. 27—1.] 
 
 27 ‘These are they which spake to 
 Pharaoh king of Egypt, to bring out 
 the children of Israel from Egypt: 
 these are that Moses and Aaron. 
 
 28 4 And it came to pass on the 
 day when the Lorp spake unto Moses 
 in the land of Egypt, 
 
 29 That the Lorp spake unto 
 Moses, saying, I am the Lorn: speak 
 thou unto Pharaoh king of Egypt all 
 that I say unto thee. 
 
 30 And Moses said before the 
 
 28. ‘This and the following verses belong 
 to the next chapter. They mark dis- 
 tinctly the beginning of a subdivision of 
 the narrative, and according to the general 
 rule in the Pentateuch (see note on ver. 14), 
 begin with a brief recapitulation. Moses 
 once more, like other sacred writers, dwells 
 strongly upon his personal deficiencies and 
 faults of character (see Ewald, II. p. 84), an 
 all but certain indication of autobiography 
 in the case of great and heroic personages. 
 
 CuHAp. VII, With this chapter begins the 
 series of miracles wrought in Egypt. ‘They 
 are progressive, ‘The first miracle is wrought 
 to accredit the mission of the brothers; it is 
 simply credential, and unaccompanied by any 
 infliction. ‘Then come signs which shew that 
 the powers of nature are subject to the will 
 of Jehovah, each plague being attended with 
 grave consequences to the Egyptians, yet not 
 inflicting severe loss or suffering; then in ra- 
 pid succession come ruinous and devastating 
 plagues, murrain, boils, hail and lightning, 
 locusts, darkness, and lastly, the death of the 
 firstborn. Each of the inflictions has a demon- 
 strable connection with Egyptian customs and 
 phenomena; each is directly aimed at some 
 Egyptian superstition; all are marvellous, not, 
 for the most part, as reversing, but as de- 
 veloping forces inherent in nature, and direct- 
 ing them to a special end. ‘The effects cor- 
 respond with these characteristics; the first 
 miracles are neglected; the following plagues 
 first alarm, and then for a season, subdue, 
 the king, who does not give way until his 
 firstborn is struck. Even that blow leaves 
 him capable of a last effort, which completes 
 his ruin, and the deliverance of the Israelites. 
 
 It is admitted by critics that the deliver- 
 ance of the Israelites must have been the 
 result of heavy calamities inflicted upon the 
 Egyptians, who certainly would never have 
 submitted to so great a loss had they been 
 in a state to prevent it. Nor could it have 
 been effected by a successful uprising of the 
 Israelites, who were not in a position to resist 
 the power of Egypt, and who, had such been 
 
 a 
 
 Bl Un, 
 
 Mite Ver I; 
 
 Lorp, Behold, I am of uncircumcised 
 lips, and how shail Pharaoh hearken 
 unto me? 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 I Moses is encouraged to g0 to Pharaoh, 7 His 
 age. 8 His rod is turned into a serpent. 11 
 The sorcerers do the like. 13 Pharaoh's heart 
 2s hardened. 14 God's message to Pharaoh, 
 19 The river is turned into blood. 
 
 ND the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 
 See, I have made thee a god to 
 
 Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall 
 be thy prophet. 
 
 the case, would certainly have preserved the 
 record of a war issuing in so glorious a re- 
 sult. It is also generaliy admitted that the 
 calamities, whatever they might have been, 
 did not include an overthrow of Egyptian 
 power by foreign enemies, or national in- 
 surrections, No notice of either, as Knobel 
 remarks, is found in Hebrew traditions; 
 and it may be added, that in neither of the 
 reigns to which the Exodus has been assigned, 
 are there any indications of either calamity. 
 Egypt was in the highest state of power 
 and prosperity through the whole period 
 within which all agree that the Exodus took 
 place. ‘The reign of Thotmes II., which has 
 been shewn in the Appendix to be that 
 which tallies best with all ascertained facts, 
 intervened between two of the ablest and 
 most successful sovereigns in Egypt, and 
 though obscure and uneventful, it gives no 
 indications of loss or disturbance; the only 
 war recorded was one that extended or con- 
 firmed his power. Late investigations have also 
 shewn that the reigns of Merneptah and his 
 successor (under whom these events are sup- 
 posed by most critics to have occurred), were 
 on the whole prosperous; one only invasion is 
 recorded in the beginning of that period and 
 it was completely repelled. A succession of 
 such plagues as are described in Exodus must 
 therefore be assumed, and is in fact accepted 
 by critics, as the only conceivable cause of 
 the result. ‘The question whether it was 
 miraculous, depends upon the ulterior ques- 
 tion, whether miracles under any circum- 
 stances are conceivable; if in any case possible 
 no case can be imagined in which the necessity 
 of a divine interposition, and its direct and 
 permanent results upon the whole state of 
 humanity, could be more satisfactorily shewn. 
 
 1. I have made thee] Or ‘appointed 
 thee.”? The expression ‘“‘a god” is not un- 
 frequently used of an appointed representative 
 of God; but here it implies that Moses will 
 stand in this peculiar relation to Pharaoh, 
 that he will address him by a prophet, z.e. by 
 one appointed to speak in his name. ‘The pas- 
 
 $2, 
 
 275 
 
276 
 
 2 Thou shalt speak all that I com- 
 mand thee: and Aaron thy brother 
 shall speak unto Pharaoh, that he send 
 the children of Israel out of his land. 
 
 3 And I will harden Pharaoh’s 
 heart, and multiply my signs and my 
 wonders in the land of Egypt. 
 
 4 But Pharaoh shall not hearken 
 unto you, that I may lay my hand 
 upon Egypt, and bring forth mine 
 armies, and my people the children of 
 Israel, out of the land of Egypt by 
 great judgments. 
 
 5 And the Egyptians shall know 
 that I am the Lorp, when I stretch 
 forth mine hand upon Egypt, and 
 bring out the children of Israel from 
 among them. 
 
 6 And Moses and Aaron did as the 
 Lorp commanded them, so did they. 
 
 7 And Moses was fourscore years 
 old, and Aaron fourscore and three 
 
 sage is an important one as illustrating the pri- 
 mary and essential characteristic of a prophet, 
 he is the declarer of God’s will and purpose. 
 
 3. and my wonders] The distinction between 
 signs and the word here rendered ‘‘ wonders,” 
 according to Kimchi, is that the former is 
 used more generally, the latter only of por- 
 tents wrought to prove a divine interposition ; 
 they were the credentials of God’s messengers, 
 
 9. thy rod] Apparently the rod before 
 described, which Moses on this occasion gives 
 to Aaron as his representative. 
 
 a serpent| <A different word is used in ch, 
 iv. 3, when the rod of Moses is changed. In 
 that passage the snake is called ‘‘Nahash,” 
 which corresponds to the Egyptian Ara, or 
 Ureus. Here another and more general term, 
 “Tannin,” is employed, which in other pas- 
 sages includes all sea or river monsters, and 
 is more specially applied to the crocodile as 
 a symbol of Egypt. It occurs in the Egyp- 
 tian ritual, c. 163, nearly in the same form, 
 ‘‘’‘Tanem,” as a synonym of the monster 
 serpent which represents the principle of an- 
 tagonism to light and life. The ancient ver- 
 sions either render the word coluber, Spaxor, 
 or simply transcribe the Hebrew; thus Syr., 
 Targ., Sam., and Saadia,. 
 
 1l. magicians] See Note at the end of 
 the chapter, 
 
 with their enchantments| ‘The derivation of 
 the original expression is ambiguous. It may 
 come from a word meaning “flame,” or from 
 another meaning ‘‘conceal;” in either case it 
 
 Be 9 Oss Vea 
 
 [v. 2—12. 
 
 years old, when they spake unto 
 Pharaoh. 
 
 8 { And the Lorp spake unto 
 Moses and unto Aaron, saying, 
 
 g When Pharaoh shall speak unto 
 you, saying, Shew a miracle for you: 
 then thou shalt say unto Aaron, Take 
 thy rod, and cast ¢ before Pharaoh, 
 and it shall become a serpent. 
 
 10 @ And Moses and Aaron went 
 in unto Pharaoh, and they did so as 
 the Lorp had commanded: and Aaron 
 cast down his rod before Pharaoh, and 
 before his servants, and it became a 
 serpent. 
 
 11 Then Pharaoh also called the 
 wise men and the sorcerers: now the 
 magicians of Egypt, they also did in 
 like manner with their enchantments. 
 
 12 For they cast down every man 
 his rod, and they became serpents: but 
 Aaron’s rod swallowed up their rods. 
 
 implies a deceptive appearance, an illusion, a 
 juggler’s trick, not an actual putting forth of 
 magic power, It bears a very near resem- 
 blance to an Egyptian term for a magic for- 
 mula, sc. Ra, or La, ap. Chabas, ‘P. M.’ p. 
 170. Moses describes the act of the sorcerers 
 as it appeared to Pharaoh and the spectators; 
 living serpents may have been thrown down 
 by the jugglers, a feat not transcending the 
 well-known skill of their modern representa- 
 tives, with whom it is a common trick to 
 handle venomous serpents, and benumb them 
 so that they are motionless and stiff as rods. 
 Pharaoh may or may not have believed in 
 a real transformation; probably he did, for 
 the jugglers have always formed a separate 
 caste, and have kept their arts secret; but in 
 either case he would naturally consider that if 
 the portent wrought by Aaron differed from 
 theirs, it was a difference of degree only, im- 
 plying merely superiority in a common art. 
 The miracle which followed was sufficient to 
 convince him had he been open to conviction. 
 ‘The accounts in the Koran, Sur. vil. and xx., 
 are curious. ‘They represent the magicians 
 as deceiving the spectators by acting upon 
 their imagination. 
 
 12. swallowed up their rods] ‘The miracle 
 here is distinctly stated, and is bound up with 
 the very substance of the narrative. Its mean- 
 ing is obvious. Ewald remarks truly that 
 this miracle was the clearest expression of the 
 truth which underlies all these stories, as he 
 is pleased to call the miracles, viz. the truth 
 and power of the religion of Jehovah in con- 
 trast with others, 
 
Vv. 13—19. | 
 13 And he hardened Pharaoh’s 
 
 heart, that he hearkened not unto 
 them; as the Lorn had said. 
 
 14 @ And the Lorn said unto Mo- 
 ses, Pharaoh’s heart zs hardened, he 
 refuseth to let the people go. 
 
 15 Get thee unto Pharaoh in the 
 morning; lo, he goeth out unto the 
 water; and thou shalt stand by the 
 river’s brink against he come; and the 
 rod which was turned to a serpent 
 shalt thou take in thine hand. 
 
 16 And thou shalt say unto him, 
 The Lorp God of the Hebrews hath 
 
 sent me unto thee, saying, Let my 
 
 BROOD OSV Tt. 
 
 17 Thus saith the Lorp, In this 
 thou shalt know that I am the Lorp: 
 behold, I will smite with the rod that 
 zs in mine hand upon the waters which 
 are in the river, and they shall be 
 turned to blood. 
 
 18 And the fish that zs in the river 
 shall die, and the river shall stink; 
 and the Egyptians shall lothe to drink 
 of the water of the river. 
 
 1g § And the Lorp spake unto 
 Moses, Say unto Aaron, Take thy 
 rod, and stretch out thine hand upon 
 the waters of Egypt, upon their 
 streams, upon their rivers, and upon 
 
 271 
 
 their ponds, and upon all their ' pools Heb, 
 of water, that they may become or heen 
 
 blood; and that there may be blood ““”’* 
 
 people go, that they may serve me in 
 the wilderness: and, behold, hitherto 
 thou wouldest not hear. 
 
 13. And he hardened| Or Pharaoh’s 
 heart was hardened. ‘The word is here 
 used intransitively, as in many passages: thus 
 all the Ancient Versions. 
 
 15. he goeth out unto the water] ‘The 
 Nile was worshipped under various names and 
 symbols, at Memphis especially, as Hapi, 2.e. 
 Apis, the sacred bull, or living representation of 
 Osiris, of whom the river was regarded as the 
 embodiment or manifestation. See ‘Zeitschrift 
 Eg.’ 1868, p. 123. It is therefore probable 
 that the king went in the morning to offer his 
 devotions. ‘This gives a peculiar force and 
 suitableness to the miracle. The reason which 
 Knobel assigns is not incompatible with this. 
 It was the season of the yearly overflowing, 
 about the middle of June. (The Arabic 
 almanacs give the 18th of Payni, i.e. the 12th 
 of June, for the festival of the rising of the 
 Nile.) The daily rise of the water was accu- 
 rately recorded, probably in the time of Moses, 
 as’ some centuries: later, under the personal 
 superintendence of the king. In early inscrip- 
 tions the Nilometer is the symbol of stability 
 and providential care. According to Diodorus 
 a Nilometer was erected at Memphis under the 
 ancient Pharaohs; one is described by Lepsius 
 which bears the name of Amenemha III., of 
 the rath dynasty, by whom the system of 
 irrigation was completed. See Appendix. 
 
 The First Plague. 
 
 17. turned to blood| In accordance with 
 the general character of the narrative it might 
 be expected that this miracle would bear a 
 certain resemblance to natural phenomena, 
 and therefore be one which Pharaoh might 
 see with amazement and dismay, yet without 
 complete conviction. It is well known that 
 before the rise the water of the Nile is green 
 
 and unfit to drink. About the 25th of June 
 it becomes clear, and then yellow, and 
 gradually reddish like ochre; this effect has 
 been generally attributed to the red earth 
 brought down from Sennaar, but Ehrenberg 
 proves that it is owing to the presence of 
 microscopic cryptogams and infusoria, The 
 depth of the colour varies in different years; 
 when it is very deep the water has an offensive 
 smell. Late travellers say that at such seasons 
 the broad turbid tide has a striking resem~ 
 blance to a river of blood. ‘The supernatural 
 character of the visitation was attested by 
 the suddenness of the change; by its immediate 
 connection with the words and act of Moses, 
 and by its effects. It killed the fishes, and 
 made the water unfit for use, neither of which 
 results follows.the annual discoloration. 
 
 18. shall lothe] Lit. ‘be weary of,” but 
 the Authorised Version expresses the meaning. 
 The word has a special force as applied to 
 the water of the Nile, which has a certain 
 sweetness when purified of the slime, and has 
 always been regarded by Egyptians as a bless- 
 ing peculiar to their land. It is the only pure 
 and wholesome water in their country, since 
 the water in wells and cisterns is unwhole- 
 some, while rain water seldom falls, and 
 fountains are extremely rare, Maillet, ap. 
 Kalisch. 
 
 19. ‘The expressions in this verse shew an 
 accurate knowledge of Egypt, where the water 
 system was complete at a period long before 
 Moses. Lepsius (‘ Zeitschrift,’ 1865 ) describes 
 it carefully. Their streams mean the natural 
 branches of the Nile in Lower Egypt. ‘The 
 word rivers should rather be canals, Mo- 
 ses uses the Egyptian word explained above 
 (ch. ii.). It includes canals. ‘They were of 
 great extent, running parallel to the Nile, and 
 
5 
 
 throughout all the land of Egypt, 
 both in vessels of wood, and in vessels 
 of stone. 
 
 20 And Moses and Aaron did so, 
 as the Lorp commanded; and he 
 
 @chap. 17.7 lifted up the rod, and smote the 
 
 waters that were in the river, in the 
 sight of Pharaoh, and in the sight of 
 
 é Psal. 78. his servants; and all the ?waters that 
 
 44. 
 
 were in the river were turned to blood. 
 
 21 And the fish that was in the 
 river died; and the river stank, and 
 the Egyptians could not drink of the 
 water of the river; and there was 
 blood throughout all the land of Egypt. 
 
 communicating with it by sluices, which were 
 opened at the rise, and closed at the subsidence 
 of the inundation. ‘The word rendered 
 ‘‘ sonds”’ refers either to natural fountains, or 
 more probably to cisterns or tanks found in 
 every town and village. The ‘‘ pools,” iit. 
 ‘gathering of waters,” were the reservoirs, 
 always large and some of enormous extent, 
 containing sufficient water to irrigate the 
 country in the dry season. 
 
 in vessels of wood| Lit. ‘tin wood and 
 stone;” but the word ‘‘vessels’’ is understood 
 and should be retained. ‘This also marks the 
 familiarity of the writer with Egyptian cus- 
 toms. The Nile water is kept in vessels and 
 is purified for use by filtering, and by certain 
 ingredients such as the paste of almonds. At 
 present the vessels are generally earthenware. 
 ‘The words in the text appear to include all 
 household vessels in which the water was kept. 
 
 21. the fish, &c.] The expression may 
 not necessarily mean ‘‘all the fish;” but a 
 great mortality is of course implied, and 
 
 EXODUS, 
 
 VIL. 
 
 [v. 2c—25. 
 
 . 
 
 22 ‘And the magicians of Egypt ¢ Wisd. 17 
 
 did so with their enchantments: and ~ 
 Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, neither 
 did he hearken unto them; as the 
 Lorp had said. | 
 
 23 And Pharaoh turned and went 
 into his house, neither did he set his 
 heart to this also. 
 
 24 And all the Egyptians digged 
 round about the river for water to 
 drink; for they could not drink of 
 the water of the river. 
 
 25 And seven days were fulfilled, 
 after that the Lorp had smitten the 
 river. 
 
 would be a most impressive warning. ‘The 
 Egyptians subsisted to a great extent on the 
 fish of the Nile, though salt-water fish was 
 regarded as impure. A mortality among the 
 fish was a plague much dreaded. In a hymn 
 to the Nile written by the scribe Enna it is 
 said that the wrath of Hapi the Nile-God 
 is a calamity for the fishes. See Maspero, 
 ‘Hymne au Nil,’ p. 27. 
 
 22. did so| From this it must be in- 
 ferred that the plague though general was not 
 universal. In numberless instances the He- 
 brew terms which imply universality must 
 be understood in a limited sense. 
 
 24. digged round about the river] This 
 statement corroborates the explanation given 
 above on v.17. The discoloured water would 
 be purified by a natural filtration. 
 
 25. seven days| ‘This marks the duration 
 of the plague. ‘The natural discoloration of 
 the Nile water lasts generally much longer, 
 about 20 days. 
 
 NOTE on CHAp. vit. 11, 
 
 11. Three names for the magicians of 
 Egypt are given in this verse. The first and 
 last occur in Genesis, ch. v. The word 
 (O%23N), wise men, is used specifically of 
 men who know occult arts. Correspond- 
 ing expressions in Arabic are well known, 
 as araph, alam, &c. ‘Thus in the Acts the 
 sorcerer Bar-jesus is called Elymas, ‘the 
 knowing one.” In ancient Egyptian the most 
 general name is Rechiu Chetu, i.e. people 
 who know things, the word ‘ things” being 
 applied technically to secret and curious 
 things. The word rendered ‘sorcerers ” 
 (n'Hv5y) occurs first in this passage. It is 
 used in the sense ‘‘muttering magic formule.” 
 According to Gesenius the original meaning, 
 
 as retained in Syriac and Ethiopic, is simply 
 to worship or pray. No exact parallel is found 
 for this word among the numerous desig- 
 nations for sorcerers in Egyptian documents ; 
 but it seems not improbable that it may be 
 connected with ‘Chesef,” a very common 
 word used specially in the sense of repelling, 
 driving away, conjuring all noxious creatures 
 by magic formule. Thus in the funeral ritual 
 there are no less than rr chapters (32—42) con- 
 taining forms for ‘‘stopping” or driving away 
 crocodiles, snakes, asps, &c. It was natural 
 that Pharaoh should have sent especially for 
 persons armed with such formule on this occa- 
 sion. ‘The more general word ‘‘chartummim,” 
 which corresponds in meaning to iepoypap- 
 
v.1—3. | 
 
 pareds or e€nynys, ‘sacred scribe” or ‘‘inter- 
 preter,” has not been yet traced in Egyptian. 
 If however it is resolved into its probable 
 elements, the first syllable 7m (char) answers 
 exactly to ‘‘cher,” one of the commonest Egyp- 
 tian words, used in compound terms as ‘‘bear- 
 ing,” ‘“‘having,” ‘possessing ;” the second part 
 corresponds to ‘‘temu” or ‘‘tum,” ‘‘to speak, 
 utter,” which is applied specifically to uttering 
 a sacred name, and apparently as ‘‘a spell.” 
 Thus on certain days of the calendar it was 
 unlawful to utter (temu) the name of Set or 
 Sutech, the Typhon, or spirit of force and 
 destruction. See ‘ Papyrus Sallier,’ Iv. p. 12, 
 last line; and Brugsch, ‘D. H.’s.v. In the 
 trilingual inscription lately discovered at San, 
 ‘¢tum” means to recite a sacred hymn, I. 34. 
 Cher-tum would thus mean ‘‘bearer of sacred 
 words.” 
 
 The most complete and interesting account 
 of Egyptian magic is given by M. Chabas in 
 his work called ‘Le Papyrus Magique,’ Har- 
 ris, 1866. Books containing magic formule 
 belonged exclusively to the king; no one was 
 permitted to consult them but the priests and 
 wise men, who formed a council or college, 
 and were called in by the Pharaoh on ail 
 occasions of difficulty. ‘These ‘‘wise men” 
 are called ‘‘scribes” (see Brugsch, ‘D. H.’ 
 p. 1576), ‘‘scribes of the sacred house,” or 
 
 EXODUS: VIII 
 
 ‘‘te-ameni,” z.e. ‘‘scribes of occult writings,” 
 &c. Under the 20th dynasty, the use of these 
 books was interdicted under pain of death. 
 ‘Two curious documents (the Papyrus Lee and 
 Rollin explained by M. Chabas, and lately 
 edited by Pleyte) give a full account of the 
 trial and execution of a criminal who fraudu- 
 lently obtained possession of some books kept 
 in the archives of the palace. No formule are 
 more common than those which were used to 
 fascinate, or to repel serpents. 
 
 The names of the two principal magicians, 
 Jannes and Jambres, who ‘‘ withstood Moses” 
 are preserved by S. Paul, 2 Tim. ii. 8. Both 
 names are Egyptian, in which language An, 
 or Anna, identical with Jannes, means scribe, 
 It was also a proper name borne by a writer 
 well known in Papyri of the time of Ra- 
 meses II. Jambres may mean Scribe of the 
 South. The tradition was widely spread. It 
 is found in the Talmud, in the later Targum, 
 and in other Rabbinical writings quoted by 
 Buxtorf, ‘Lex. H. C.’ p. 946. Pliny, who 
 makes Moses, Jamnes, and Jotape heads of 
 magic factions, seems to have derived his in- 
 formation from other sources, and he is fol- 
 lowed by Apuleius, Numenius, a Pythago- 
 rean, quoted by Eusebius, comes nearer to 
 the truth, though according to Greek habit 
 he transforms Moses into Muszus. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 1 Frogs are sent. 8 Pharaoh sueth to Moses, 
 12 and Moses by prayer removeth them away. 
 16 The dust is turned into lice, which the 
 magicians could not do. 20 The swarms of 
 flies. 25 Pharaoh inclineth to let the people 
 20, 32 but yet is hardened. 
 
 ND the Lorp spake unto Mo- 
 
 ses, Go unto Pharaoh, and say 
 
 unto him, Thus saith the Lorn, Let 
 my people go, that they may serve me. 
 2 And if thou refuse to let them 
 go, behold, I will smite all thy bor- 
 ders with frogs: 
 3 And the river shall bring forth 
 frogs abundantly, which shall go up 
 
 and come into thine house, and into 
 
 The Second Plague. 
 
 CuAP. VIII. 2. with frogs] The an- 
 noyance and suffering caused by frogs are 
 described by ancient writers, quoted by Bo- 
 chart, ‘Hier.’ m1. In Egypt they sometimes 
 amount at present to a severe visitation. Some 
 months appear to have elapsed between this 
 and the former plague, if they made their 
 appearance at the usual time, that is (accord- 
 ing to Seetzen, who gives the fullest and most 
 accurate account of them, Vol. II. p. 492) 
 in September. He describes two species, the 
 rana Nilotica, and the rana Mosaica, called 
 by the natives ‘‘Dofda,” which exactly cor- 
 responds to the Hebrew word used in this 
 and no other passage, except in the psalms 
 taken from it; it is not a general designation, 
 but restricted to the species, and probably of 
 
 Egyptian origin, See Appendix and end of 
 volume. ‘They are small, do not leap much, 
 are much like toads, and fill the whole country 
 with their croakings. They are generally con- 
 sumed rapidly by the Ibis (ardea Ibis), which 
 thus preserves the land from the stench de- 
 scribed v.14. ‘This plague was thus, like the 
 preceding, in general accordance with natural 
 phenomena, but marvellous both for its extent 
 and intensity, and for its direct connection 
 with the words and acts of God’s messengers. 
 It had also apparently, like the other plagues, 
 a direct bearing upon Egyptian superstitions. 
 A female deity with a frog’s head, named 
 Heka, was worshipped in the district of Sah 
 (i.e. Benihassan) as the wife of Chnum, the 
 god of the cataracts, or of the inundation ; see 
 Brugsch, ‘Geog.’ p. 224. Lepsius has shewn 
 that the frog was connected with the most 
 
 279 
 
280 
 
 thy bedchamber, and upon thy bed, 
 and into the house of thy servants, 
 and upon thy people, and into thine 
 ovens, and into thy 'kneadingtroughs : 
 
 4 And the frogs shall come up 
 both on thee, and upon thy people, 
 and upon all thy servants. 
 
 5 § And the Lorp spake unto 
 Moses, Say unto Aaron, Stretch forth 
 thine hand with thy rod over the 
 streams, over the rivers, and over the 
 ponds, and cause frogs to come up 
 upon the land of Egypt. 
 
 6 And Aaron stretched out his 
 hand over the waters of Egypt; and 
 the frogs came up, and covered the 
 land of Egypt. 
 aWisd.17, 7 *And the magicians did so with 
 7s their enchantments, and brought up 
 
 frogs upon the land of Egypt. 
 8 4 Then Pharaoh called for Mo- 
 ses and Aaron, and said, Intreat the 
 Lorp, that he may take away the 
 frogs from me, and from my people; 
 join * and I will let the people go, that they 
 over me, may do sacrifice unto the Lorn, 
 Or, g And Moses said unto Pharaoh, 
 gee ee, Glory over me: 'when shall I in- 
 
 l Or, 
 dough. 
 
 i Or, 
 
 ancient forms of nature-worship in Egypt. 
 See also Duemichen, ‘ #g. Zeitschrift,’ 1869, 
 p. 6. According to Cheremon (see Bunsen’s 
 ‘Egypt,’ Vol. v. p. 736) the frog was regarded 
 as a symbol of regeneration. See the note, 
 p. 242, on the adoration of the frog by the 
 father of Rameses II. 
 
 3. into thine house] This appears to have 
 been peculiar to the plague, as such. No 
 mention is made of it by travellers. It was 
 specially the visitation which would be felt by 
 the scrupulously clean Egyptians. 
 
 kneadingtroughs| Not ‘‘dough,” as in the 
 margin. 
 
 7. ‘The magicians would seem to have 
 been able to increase the plague, but not to 
 remove it; hence Pharaoh’s application to 
 Moses, the first symptom of yielding. An 
 explanation, which is certainly ingenious and 
 not improbable, is suggested by a late com- 
 mentator (Hirsch, 1869). He assumes that 
 the words ‘‘ the magicians did so,” mean that 
 they imitated the action of Aaron, stretching 
 out their rods, but using magic formule 
 with the intention of driving away the frogs, 
 the result being not only a frustration of their 
 object, but an increase of the plague. 
 
 EXODUS! VITE 
 
 [v. 4—15. 
 
 treat for thee, and for thy servants, ; 
 and for thy people, 'to destroy the t Heb. 
 frogs from thee and thy houses, that ““'% 
 they may remain in the river only? 
 
 10 And he said, 'To morrow. And 1 Or, 
 he said, Be it according to thy word : Zo'mon, 
 that thou mayest know that there is” 
 none like unto the Lorp our God. 
 
 11 And the frogs shall depart from 
 thee, and from thy houses, and from 
 thy servants, and from thy people; 
 they shall remain in the river only. 
 
 12 And Moses and Aaron went 
 out from Pharaoh: and Moses cried 
 unto the Lorp because of the frogs 
 which he had brought against Pha- 
 raoh. | 
 
 13 And the Lorn did according 
 to the word of Moses; and the frogs 
 died out of the houses, out of the 
 villages, and out of the fields. 
 
 14 And they gathered them to- 
 gether upon heaps: and the land 
 stank. 
 
 15 But when Pharaoh saw that 
 there was respite, he hardened his 
 heart, and hearkened not unto them; 
 as the Lorp had said. 
 
 9. Glory over me] ‘The expression is 
 rather obscure, but it is supposed by most of 
 the later, and by some early commentators, to 
 mean, as the margin renders it, ‘‘have honour 
 over me,” z.e, have the honour, or advantage 
 over me, directing me when I shall entreat 
 God for thee and thy servants, &c. Moses 
 thus accepts the first intimation of a change 
 of mind in Pharaoh, and expresses him- 
 self, doubtless in accordance with Egyptian 
 usage, at once courteously and deferentially. 
 It is, however, obvious that such an expression 
 would not have been attributed to him by a 
 later writer. The old versions, LXX., Vulg., 
 Saadia, who are followed by Gesenius, gene- 
 rally render the word, appoint for me, deter- 
 mine for me when, &c., the Syriac has ‘‘ ask 
 for me a time when;” this agrees well with 
 the answer ‘‘ to-morrow,” 
 
 when] Or by when; i.e. for what exact 
 time. Pharaoh’s answer in ~. ro refers to this, 
 by to-morrow. ‘The shortness of the time 
 would, of course, be a test of the supernatural 
 character of the transaction. 
 
 13. villages] Lit. “inclosures, or court- 
 yards,” 
 
v. 16—21. | 
 
 16 4 And the Lorp said unto Mo- 
 ses, Say unto Aaron, Stretch out thy 
 rod, and smite the dust of the land, 
 that it may become lice throughout 
 all the land of Egypt. 
 
 17 And they did so; for Aaron 
 
 stretched out his hand with his rod, 
 and smote the dust of the earth, 
 and it became lice in man, and in 
 beast; all the dust of the land be- 
 came lice throughout all the land of 
 Egypt. 
 18 And the magicians did so with 
 their enchantments to bring forth lice, 
 but they could not: so there were lice 
 upon man, and upon beast. 
 
 19 Then the magicians said unto 
 
 Pharaoh, This zs the finger of God: 
 
 EXODUS. VIII. 
 
 and Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, 
 and he hearkened not unto them; as 
 the Lorp had said. 
 
 20 @ And the Lorp said unto 
 Moses, Rise up early in the morning, 
 and stand before Pharaoh; lo, he 
 cometh forth to the water; and say 
 unto him, Thus saith the Lorn, Let 
 my people go, that they may serve 
 Me. | 
 
 21 Else, if thou wilt not let my 
 people go, behold, I will send 'swarms | or, 
 
 a mixture 
 
 of fries upon thee, and upon thy of noisome 
 servants, and upon thy people, and so 
 
 into thy houses: and the houses of 
 the Egyptians shall be full of swarms 
 of flies, and also the ground whereon 
 they are. 
 
 The Third Plague. 
 
 It is observed by Hebrew commentators 
 that the nine plagues are divided into three 
 groups: distinct warnings are given of the first 
 two plagues in each group; the third in each is 
 inflicted without any previous notice, the third, 
 lice, the sixth, Soils, the ninth, darkness. 
 
 16. the dust of the land| ‘The two pre- 
 ceding plagues fell upon the Nile. ‘This fell 
 on the earth, which was worshipped under 
 the name Seb, its personification, regarded, in 
 the pantheistic system of Egypt, as the father 
 of the gods. See Brugsch, ‘Zeitschrift,’ 1868, 
 p. 123. Anespecial sacredness was attached 
 to the black fertile soil of the basin of the Nile, 
 called Chemi, from which the ancient name 
 of Egypt is supposed to be derived. 
 
 lice] In Hebrew ‘“‘Kinnim.” ‘The word 
 occurs only in connection with this plague. 
 
 These insects are generally identified with — 
 
 mosquitos, a plague nowhere greater than in 
 Egypt. ‘They are most troublesome towards 
 October, i.e. soon after the plague of frogs, and 
 are dreaded not only for the pain and annoyance 
 which they cause, but also because they are 
 said to penetrate into the body through the 
 nostrils and ears. ‘Thus the LXX. (cxvides), 
 Philo, and Origen, whose testimony as resi- 
 
 dents in Egypt is of great weight. ‘The mos- . 
 
 quito net is an indispensable article to Egyptian 
 travellers. There are however some grave 
 objections to this interpretation. Mosquitos 
 are produced in stagnant waters where their 
 larve are deposited, whereas these kinnim 
 spring from the dust of the earth, The word 
 in our version may be nearer to the original, 
 which is probably Egyptian; see Appendix. 
 Late travellers (e.g. Sir S. Baker) describe the 
 visitation of vermin in very similar terms, “it 
 
 is as though the very dust were turned into 
 lice.’ ‘The lice which he describes are a sort 
 of tick, not larger than a grain of sand, which 
 when filled with blood expands to the size of 
 a hazel nut. Saadia renders the word ‘ lice.” 
 
 17. all the dust] The sense is here ne- 
 cessarily limited: the meaning being, the dust 
 swarmed with lice in every part of the land. 
 
 19. the finger of God] ‘This expression 
 is thoroughly Egyptian; it need not imply 
 that the magicians recognised Jehovah as the 
 God who wrought the marvel, which they 
 attributed generally to the act of the Deity. 
 They may possibly have referred it to a god 
 hostile to their own protectors, such as Set, or 
 Sutech, the Typhon of later mythology, to 
 whom such calamities were attributed by 
 popular superstition. 
 
 The Fourth Plague. 
 
 20. cometh forth to the water| See note 
 ch. vii. 15. It is not improbable that on this 
 occasion Pharaoh went to the Nile with a 
 procession in order to open the solemn festi- 
 val, which was held 120 days after the first 
 rise, at the end of October or eariy in No- 
 vember, when the inundation is abating and 
 the first traces of vegetation are seen on the 
 deposit of fresh soil. 
 
 The plague now denounced may be re- 
 garded as connected with the atmosphere, each 
 element in turn being converted into a scourge. 
 The air was an object of worship, personified 
 in the deity Shu, the son of Ra, the sun-god; 
 or in Isis, queen of heaven. 
 
 Q1. swarms of flies} The Hebrew has 
 the word ‘ Arob,” which most of the ancient, 
 and some modern interpreters, understand 
 to mean a mixture of beasts and insects, a sense 
 
 281 
 
282 
 
 t Heb. 
 
 a redemp- 
 
 zon. 
 
 22 And I will sever in that day 
 the land of Goshen, in which my 
 people dwell, that no swarms of flies 
 shall be there; to the end thou may- 
 est know that I am the Lorp in the 
 midst of the earth. 
 
 23 And I will put ‘a division be- 
 tween my people and thy people: ' to 
 
 ao mop. DLOITOW shall this sign be. 
 row. 24 And the Lorn did so; and 
 
  Wisd. 16. there came a grievous swarm o 1eS 
 g 
 
 nf into the house of Pharaoh, and into 
 
 his servants’ houses, and into all the 
 Or, pane 
 vestroyed, aNd of Egypt: the land was ! cor 
 
 rupted by reason of the swarm of flies. 
 
 derived from the Arabic ‘‘ Arab,” ‘+ mixed.” 
 (Thus the Vulg., Targ., Saadia, Syr., and 
 Aquila.) It is now, however, more generally 
 supposed that a particular species of fly is de- 
 scribed, the dog-fly (kuvouuia, LX X.), which 
 at certain seasons is described as a far worse 
 plague than mosquitos. The bite is exceedingly 
 sharp and painful, causing severe inflammation, 
 especially in the eyelids. Coming in immense 
 swarms they coverall objectsin black and loath- 
 some masses and attack every exposed part of a 
 traveller’s person with incredible pertinacity. 
 Some commentators however adopt the opinion 
 of CGdmann, who identifies the species here 
 described with the blatta orientalis, or the 
 kakerlaque, a species of beetle, of which Munk 
 (‘Palestine,’ p. 120) says: ‘*Ceux qui ont 
 voyage sur le Nil savent combien cet in- 
 secte est incommode: les bateaux en sont in- 
 festés, et ‘on les y voit souvent par milliers,” 
 Kalisch quotes passages which prove that they 
 inflict painful bites and consume all sorts of 
 materials. ‘There would be a special fitness 
 in this plague, since the beetle was reverenced 
 by the Egyptians as the symbol of life, of re- 
 productive or creative power. No object is 
 more common in hieroglyphics, where it 
 represents the word ‘‘cheper,” “‘to exist,” or 
 ‘*to become.” The sun-god, as creator, bore 
 the name Chepera, and is represented in the 
 form, or with the head, of a beetle. The 
 word ‘arob,” which occurs nowhere else, 
 moreover bears a very near resemblance to 
 an old Egyptian word, retained in Coptic, 
 which designates a species of beetle. See 
 Brugsch, ‘D. H.’ p. 178, s.v. ‘ Abeb.’ 
 
 22. I will sever, &c.| ‘This severance con- 
 stituted a specific difference between this and 
 the preceding plagues. Pharaoh could not of 
 course attribute the exemption of Goshen from 
 a scourge, which fell on the valley of the Nile, to 
 an Egyptian deity, certainly not to Chepera 
 (see the last note), a special object of worship 
 in lower Egypt, 
 
 IPO RD HURS YS a Uae OE 
 
 [v. 22—27. 
 
 25 % And Pharaoh called for 
 Moses and for Aaron, and said, Go 
 ye, sacrifice to your God in the 
 land. 
 
 26 And Moses said, It is not meet 
 so to do; for we shall sacrifice the 
 abomination of the Egyptians to the 
 Lorp our God: lo, shall we sacrifice 
 the abomination of the Egyptians be- 
 fore their eyes, and will they not 
 stone us? | 
 
 27 We will go three days’ journey 
 
 into the wilderness, and sacrifice to 
 
 the Lorp our God, as ¢ he shall com- © chap. 34 
 16, 
 
 mand us. 
 
 in the midst] Literally ‘‘ heart.” The idiom 
 is common in Hebrew, but there may possibly 
 be an allusion to the Egyptian ‘‘ heart” used 
 specially to designate lower Egypt. 
 
 25. to your God} Pharaoh now admits 
 the existence and power of the God whom he 
 had professed not to know; but, as Moses is 
 careful to record, he recognises Him only as 
 the national Deity of the Israelites. 
 
 in the land] i.e. In Egypt, not beyond the 
 frontier. 
 
 26. the abomination] ‘The expression may 
 mean either the objeet of an abominable wor- 
 ship (as Chemosh is called the abomination 
 of Moab, and Moloch the abomination of 
 Ammon, see 1 Kings xi. 7), or an animal 
 which the Egyptians held it sacrilegious to 
 slay. The latter meaning seems more probable, 
 considering that the words were addressed 
 to Pharaoh. Thus Ros, Knob., but the 
 former meaning is preferred by Bp. Words- 
 worth, and is given by the LXX., Targ., 
 Vulg., and Syr. In either case the ox, bull, 
 or cow, is meant. ‘The cow was never sacri- 
 ficed in Egypt, being sacred to Isis; but as 
 a general rule, no animal was slaughtered in 
 a district where it represented a local deity. 
 From a very early age the ox was worshipped 
 throughout Egypt, and more especially at 
 Heliopolis and Memphis under various desig- 
 nations, Apis, Mnevis, Amen-Ehe, as the 
 symbol or manifestation of their greatest 
 deities, Osiris, Atum, Ptah, and Isis, 
 
 27. three days’ journey| See note on ch. 
 ili. 18. ‘The demand does not refer to a 
 journey to Sinai, which would have oc- 
 cupied much longer time. In the next verse 
 Pharaoh grants the permission, not however 
 without imposing a condition which would 
 have enabled him to take effectual measures to 
 prevent the final emigration of the Israelites. 
 The power of the Pharaohs extended far 
 beyond the frontier, especially on the road to 
 
v. 28—8.] 
 
 28 And Pharaoh said, I will let 
 you go, that ye may sacrifice to the 
 Lorp your God in the wilderness ; 
 only ye shall not go very far away: 
 intreat for me. 
 
 29 And Moses said, Behold, I go 
 out from thee, and I will intreat the 
 Lorp that the swarms of /izes may 
 depart from Pharaoh, from his ser- 
 vants, and from his people, to mor- 
 row: but let not Pharaoh deal de- 
 ceitfully any more in not letting the 
 people go to sacrifice to the Lorn. 
 
 30 And Moses went out from Pha- 
 raoh, and intreated the Lorp. 
 
 31 And the Lorn did according to 
 the word of Moses; and he removed 
 the swarms of fies from Pharaoh, 
 from his servants, and from his peo- 
 ple; there remained not one. 
 
 32 And Pharaoh hardened his heart 
 at this time also, neither would he let 
 the people go. 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 The murrain of beasts. 8 The plague of boils 
 and blains. 13 His message about the hail, 
 22 The plague of hail. 27 Pharaoh sueth to 
 Moses, 35 but yet ts hardened. 
 
 HEN the Lorp said unto Mo- 
 
 ses, Go in unto Pharaoh, and 
 
 mt 
 
 Palestine, which was commanded by fortresses 
 erected by the early sovereigns of the 18th 
 dynasty. 
 
 The Fifth Plague. 
 
 Cuap. IX. 3. a very grievous murrain] 
 Or ‘‘pestilence;” but the word murrain, 7.e. a 
 great mortality, exactly expresses the meaning. 
 ‘This terrible visitation struck far more severely 
 than the preceding, which had caused distress 
 and suffering; it attacked the resources of the 
 nation. ‘The disease does not appear to have 
 been common in ancient times, no distinct 
 notice is found on the monuments, unless it is 
 included, as seems not improbable, under the 
 term ‘‘Aat,” which, as M. Chabas shews, 
 applies to the contagious or epidemic pestilence 
 which frequently, as it would almost seem 
 annually, broke out after the subsidence of the 
 inundation ; see ‘Mélanges Egyptologiques,’ I. 
 
 . 39. Within the last few years the murrain 
 has thrice fallen upon Egypt, in 1842, 1863, and 
 1866 (also 60 years previously); when nearly 
 the. whole of the herds have been destroyed. 
 The disease appears to have been of the same 
 kind as that which lately fell so severely upon 
 
 EXODUS: 
 
 VMeEPROLX. 
 
 tell him, Thus saith the Lorp God 
 of the Hebrews, Let my people go, 
 that they may serve. me. 
 
 2. For if thou refuse to let them go, 
 and wilt hold them still, 
 
 3 Behold, the hand of the Lorp 
 is upon thy cattle which zs in the 
 field, upon the horses, upon the asses, 
 upon the camels, upon the oxen, and 
 upon the sheep: there shall be a very 
 grievous murrain. 
 
 4 And the Lorp shall sever be- 
 tween the cattle of Israel and the 
 cattle of Egypt: and there shall no- 
 thing die of all that zs the children’s of 
 Israel. 
 
 5 And the Lorp appointed a set 
 time, saying, To morrow the Lorp 
 shall do this thing in the land. 
 
 6 And the Lorp did that thing on 
 the morrow, and all the cattle of 
 Egypt died: but of the cattle of the 
 children of Israel died not one. 
 
 7 And Pharaoh sent, and, behold, 
 there was not one of the cattle of 
 the Israelites dead. And the heart 
 of Pharaoh was hardened, and he did 
 not let the people go. 
 
 8 @ And the Lorp said unto Mo- 
 
 ses and unto Aaron, Take to you 
 
 28 
 
 England. The exact time of the infliction is not 
 mentioned; but in Egypt the cattle are in the 
 fields from December to the end of April, and 
 the disease may have broken out in the former 
 month when the cattle were predisposed to it by 
 the change from confinement to the open air, 
 and from old to fresh pastures; a change more 
 dangerous than usual in so exceptional a year. 
 In 1863 the murrain began in November, and 
 was at its height in December. 
 
 the camels| ‘These animals are only twice 
 mentioned, here and Gen. xii. 16, in connec- 
 tion with Egypt. In this passage the enu- 
 meration of cattle is studiously complete. It 
 is shewn in the Appendix, that though camels 
 are never represented on the monuments, they 
 were known to the Egyptians and were pro- 
 bably used on the frontier bordering on the 
 desert. 
 
 7. was hardened| Pharaoh may have at- 
 tributed to natural causes both the severity 
 of the plague and even the exemption of the 
 Israelites, a pastoral race well acquainted with 
 all that appertained to the care of cattle; 
 and dwelling in a district probably far more 
 healthy than the rest of lower Egypt. 
 
284 
 
 handfuls of ashes of the furnace, and 
 let Moses sprinkle it toward the hea- 
 ven in the sight of Pharaoh. 
 
 g And it shall become small dust 
 in all the land of Egypt, and shall be 
 a boil breaking forth with blains upon 
 man, and upon beast, throughout all 
 the land of Egypt. 
 
 10 And they took ashes of the 
 furnace, and stood before Pharaoh; 
 and Moses sprinkled it up toward 
 heaven; and it became a boil break- 
 ing forth wth blains upon man, and 
 upon beast. 
 
 tr And the magicians could not 
 stand before Moses because of the 
 boils; for the boil was upon the ma- 
 gicians, and upon all the Egyptians. 
 
 12 And the Lorn hardened the 
 
 The Sixth Plague, 
 
 This marks a distinct advance and change 
 in the character of the visitations. Hitherto 
 the Egyptians had not been attacked directly 
 in their own persons, It is the second plague 
 which was not preceded by a demand and 
 warning, probably on account of the peculiar 
 hardness shewn by Pharaoh in reference to the 
 murrain. 
 
 8. ashes of the furnace| ‘The Hebrew word 
 occurs only in the Pentateuch, and is proba- 
 bly of Egyptian origin. The act was evidently 
 symbolical: the ashes were to be sprinkled 
 towards heaven, challenging, so to speak, the 
 Egyptian Deities, and specially it may be Neit, 
 who bore the designation ‘‘’The Great Mother 
 Queen of highest heaven,” and was wor- 
 shipped as the tutelary Goddess of lower 
 Egypt. There may possibly be a reference to 
 an Egyptian custom of scattering to the 
 winds ashes of victims offered to Sutech, or 
 Typhon. Human sacrifices said to have been 
 offered at Heliopolis under the Shepherd 
 dynasty were abolished by Amosis I., but 
 some part of the rite may have been retained, 
 and the memory of the old superstition would 
 give a terrible significance to the act. ‘Thus 
 Burder, Hevernick and Kurtz. 
 
 9. a boil breaking forth with blains] The 
 word rendered boil is derived from ‘ burn- 
 ing inflammation,” and is used elsewhere of 
 plague-boils, of the leprosy, and elephantiasis. 
 See Deut. xxviii. 27,and 35, which may specially 
 refer to this passage. Here it means probably 
 a burning tumour or carbuncle breaking out 
 in pustulous ulcers. Cutaneous eruptions of 
 extreme severity are common in the valley of 
 the Nile, some bearing a near resemblance to 
 
 ES CS ae 
 
 [v. 9—15. 
 heart of Pharaoh, and he hearkened 
 
 2I 
 
 rc 
 
 not unto them; “as the Lorp had ¢ chap. 
 
 spoken unto Moses. 
 
 13 4 And the Lorp said unto Mo- 
 ses, Rise up early in the morning, and 
 stand before Pharaoh, and say unto 
 him, Thus saith the Lorp God of the 
 Hebrews, Let my people go, that 
 they may serve me. 
 
 14 For I will at this time send all 
 my plagues upon thine heart, and 
 upon thy servants, and upon thy 
 people; that thou mayest know that 
 there is none like me in all the 
 earth. 
 
 15 For now I will stretch out my 
 hand, that | may smite thee and thy 
 people with pestilence; and thou shalt 
 be cut off from the earth. 
 
 the symptoms described in this passage. ‘The 
 date is not marked. It was probably soon 
 after the last plague. In an old Egyptian 
 calendar mention is made of severe contagious 
 diseases in December, Pap. Sall. tv. The 
 analogy of natural law is still preserved, the 
 miracle consisting in the severity of the plague 
 and its direct connection with the act of 
 Moses. 
 
 11. ‘This verse seems to imply that the ma- 
 gicians now formally gave way and confessed 
 their defeat. 
 
 The Seventh Plague. 
 
 13—34. The plague of hail: with this 
 begins the last series of plagues, which differ 
 from the former both in their severity and 
 their effects. Each produced a temporary, 
 but real change in Pharaoh’s feelings. 
 
 14. all my plagues| ‘This applies to 
 all the plagues which follow; the effect of 
 each was foreseen and foretold. ‘The words 
 ‘¢at this time” are understood by some to limit 
 the application to the plague of hail, but they 
 point more probably to a rapid and continu- 
 ous succession of blows. ‘The plagues which 
 precede appear to have been spread over a 
 considerable time; the first message of Moses 
 was delivered after the early harvest of the 
 year before, when the Israelites could gather 
 stubble, i.e. in April and May: the second 
 mission, when the plagues began, was proba- 
 bly towards the end of June, and they went 
 on at intervals until the winter; this plagu 
 was in February; see note on v. 31. ; 
 
 15. For now, &c.] This verse (as scholars 
 are agreed, e.g. Rosenmiiller, Ewald, Knobel, 
 Keil) should be rendered thus: For now in- 
 
Heb. 
 
 et not hts 
 
 v. 16—27.] 
 16 And in very deed for ?this 
 
 cause have I traised thee up, for to 
 shew in thee my power; and that my 
 name may be declared throughout all 
 the earth. 
 
 17 As yet exaltest thou thyself 
 against my people, that thou wilt not 
 let them go? 
 
 18 Behold, to morrow about this 
 time I will cause it to rain a very 
 grievous hail, such as hath not been 
 in Egypt since the foundation thereof 
 even until now. 
 
 1g Send therefore now, and gather 
 thy cattle, and all that thou hast in 
 the field; for upon every man and 
 beast which shall be found in the field, 
 and shall not be brought home, the 
 hail shall come down upon them, and 
 they shall die. 
 
 20 He that feared the word of the 
 Lorp among the servants of Pharaoh 
 made his servants and his cattle flee 
 into the houses : 
 
 21 And he that ‘regarded not the 
 
 - otunte. word of the Lorp left his servants 
 
 and his cattle in the field. 
 
 EXODUS. IX. 
 
 22 ™ And the Lorn said unto Mo- 
 ses, Stretch forth thine hand toward 
 heaven, that there may be hail in all 
 the land of Egypt, upon man, and 
 upon beast, and upon every herb of 
 the field, throughout the land of Egypt. 
 
 23 And Moses stretched forth his 
 rod toward heaven: and the Lorp 
 sent thunder and hail, and the fire 
 ran along upon the ground; and the 
 Lorp rained hail upon the land of 
 Egypt. | 
 
 24. So there was hail, and fire min- 
 gled with the hail, very grievous, such 
 as there was none like it in all the 
 land of Egypt since it became a nation. 
 
 25 And the hail smote throughout 
 all the land of Egypt all that was in 
 the field, both man and beast; and 
 the hail smote every herb of the field, 
 and brake every tree of the field. 
 
 26 Only in the land of Goshen, 
 where the children of Israel were, was 
 there no hail. 
 
 27 4 And Pharaoh sent, and called 
 for Moses and Aaron, and said unto 
 them, I have sinned this time: the 
 
 I 
 
 deed had I stretched forth my hand 
 and smitten thee and thy people with 
 the pestilence then hadst thou been 
 cut off from the earth. ‘The next verse 
 gives the reason why God had not thus in- 
 flicted a summary punishment once for all. 
 
 16. have I raised thee up] ‘The margin 
 made thee stand is correct: the mean- 
 ing is, not that God raised Pharaoh to a posi- 
 tion of rank and power, but that he kept him 
 standing, i.e. permitted him to live and hold 
 out until His own purpose was accomplished. 
 
 18. avery grievous hail] ‘This verse dis- 
 tinctly states that the miracle consisted in the 
 magnitude of the infliction and in its imme- 
 diate connection with the act of Moses. 
 Travellers in lower Egypt speak of storms 
 of snow, thunder and lightning in the winter 
 months; and Seetzen and Willman (quoted 
 by Knobel) describe storms of thunder and 
 hail in March. A friend (Rev. T. H. Tooke) 
 describes a storm of extreme severity, which 
 lasted 24 hours, in the middle of February, 
 at Benihassan. ‘The natives spoke of it as 
 not uncommon at that season. 
 
 19. thy cattle] In Egypt the cattle are 
 sent to pasture in the open country from Ja- 
 nuary to April, when the grass is abundant ; 
 
 see note on v, 3. They are kept in stalls the 
 rest of the year. ‘The word ‘‘ eather” does 
 not exactly express the meaning of the ori- 
 ginal, ‘‘cause to flee,” ze. bring them rapidly 
 under cover. 
 
 20. the word of the Lorp] ‘This gives 
 the first indication that the warnings had a 
 salutary effect upon the Egyptians. See ch. 
 ye ee 
 
 22. in all the land of Egypt| The storms 
 described above fell on lower Egypt: the ex- 
 pression here may imply that this extended 
 to the upper valley of the Nile, but it is pos- 
 sible that the land of Mizraim is used specially 
 to designate the Delta and the adjoining dis- 
 trict. 
 
 23. and the fire ran along upon the ground | 
 The expression is peculiar (literally ‘‘ fire 
 walked earthwards”), and appears to describe 
 a succession of flashes mingled with the hail : 
 our Authorised Version seems to present a true 
 and graphic account of the phenomenon. 
 
 25. smote] ‘The words imply heavy da- 
 mage both to herbs and trees, but not total 
 destruction: the loss however must have been 
 enormous. 
 
 27. this time} 
 that I have sinned. 
 
 i.e. I acknowledge now 
 
 285 
 
286 
 
 +t Heb. 
 
 voices of 
 
 God. 
 
 € Psal. 24. 
 I. 
 
 t Heb. 
 
 hidden, or, 
 
 dark. 
 
 Lorp 7s righteous, and I and my people 
 are wicked. 
 
 28 Intreat the Lorn (for it is 
 enough) that there be no more ' mighty 
 thunderings and hail; and I will let 
 you go, and ye shall stay no longer. 
 
 29 And Moses said unto him, As 
 soon as I am gone out of the city, I 
 will spread abroad my hands unto the 
 Lorp; and the thunder shall cease, 
 neither shall there be any more hail; 
 that thou mayest know how that the 
 ‘earth zs the Lorp’s. 
 
 30 But as for thee and thy servants, 
 I know that ye will not yet fear the 
 Lorp God. 
 
 31 And the flax and the barley was 
 smitten: for the barley was in the 
 ear, and the flax was bolled. 
 
 32 But the wheat and the rie were 
 not smitten: for they were ‘not grown 
 
 3 3 And Moses went out of the city 
 
 BOO Tsien, 
 
 [v. 28—1, 
 
 from Pharaoh, and spread abroad his © 
 hands unto the Lorn: and the thun- 
 ders and hail ceased, and the rain was 
 not poured upon the earth. 
 
 34 And when Pharaoh saw that 
 the rain and the hail and the thunders 
 were ceased, he sinned yet more, and 
 hardened his heart, he and his servants, 
 
 35 And the heart of Pharaoh was 
 hardened, neither would he let the 
 children of Israel go; as the Lorp 
 had spoken 'by Moses. 
 
 CHAPTER 
 God threateneth to send locusts. 4% Pharaoh, 
 moved by his servants, inclineth to let the 
 Lsraelites go. 12 The plague of the locusts. 
 16 Pharaoh sueth to Moses. 21 The plague 
 
 of darkness. 24 Pharaoh sueth unto Moses, 
 27 but yet is hardened. 
 
 ND the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 
 = 
 
 Go in unto Pharaoh: for 7] *chap.4 
 
 have hardened his heart, and the heart 
 of his servants, that I might shew 
 these my signs before him: 
 
 the Lorp] ‘Thus for the first time Pharaoh 
 explicitly recognizes Jehovah as God, 
 
 28. for it is enough] ‘The Authorised Ver- 
 sion is not literal, but it probably expresses 
 the meaning of the original, which is some- 
 what obscure, and it is much, z.e. enough, 
 that there should be voices of God (thunder- 
 ings) and hail, no more are needed now. 
 
 29. the earth is the Lorns| This de- 
 claration has a direct reference to Egyptian 
 superstition. Each God was held to have 
 special power within a given district; Pharaoh 
 had learned that Jehovah was a God, he was 
 now to admit that his power extended over 
 the whole earth. The unity and universality 
 of the Divine power are tenets distinctly pro- 
 mulgated in the Pentateuch, and though occa- 
 sionally recognized in ancient Egyptian docu- 
 ments (e.g. in the early copies of the 17th 
 chapter of the Funeral Ritual under the r1th 
 dynasty), were overlaid at a very early period 
 by systems alternating between Polytheism and 
 Pantheism. 
 
 31. the flax was bolled| i.e. in blos- 
 som. ‘This is a point of great importance. 
 It marks the time. In the north of Egypt 
 the barley ripens and flax blossoms about the 
 middle of February, or at the latest early in 
 March, and both are gathered in before April, 
 when the wheat harvest begins (Forskal and 
 Seetzen ap. Knobel). The cultivation of flax 
 must have been of great importance; linen 
 was preferred to any material and exclusively 
 
 used by the priests. It is frequently men- 
 tioned on Egyptian monuments. Four kinds 
 are noted by Pliny (xIx. 1) as used in Egypt. 
 He makes special mention of Tanis, ze, Zoan, 
 as one of the places famous for flax. ‘The 
 texture was remarkably fine, in general qua- 
 lity equal to the best now made, and for the 
 evenness of the threads, without knot or break, 
 superior to any of modern manufacture. Wil- 
 kinson on Herod. Il. c. 37, p. 54. 
 
 32. rie] Rather spelt, triticum spelta, the 
 common food of the ancient Egyptians, now 
 called doora by the natives: the only grain, 
 according to Wilkinson (on Herod. II..c. 36), 
 represented on the sculptures: the name how- 
 ever occurs on the monuments very frequently 
 in combination with other species. See Brugsch, 
 DoH wp. aay: 
 
 34. hardened] Different words are used 
 in this and the following verse: here the word 
 means ‘‘heavy,” 7z.e. obtuse, incapable of 
 forming a right judgment; the other, which 
 is more frequently used in this narrative, is 
 stronger and implies a stubborn resolution. 
 The LXX. render the former word ¢Bdpuve, 
 the latter éoxAnpvvén. The other old Versions 
 mark the distinction with equal clearness. 
 
 The Eighth Plague. 
 
 CHAP. X. 1—20. I have hardened] Lite- 
 rally ‘*made heavy.” ‘This state of mind, 
 though judicial, may be accounted for psy- 
 chologically by the fact that the corn, to 
 
 t Heb. 
 by the 
 nand of 
 Moses. 
 
Wisd, 
 
 . 9 
 teb. eye. 
 
 vy. 2—8.] 
 
 2 And that thou mayest tell in the 
 ears of thy son, and of thy son’s son, 
 what things I have wrought in Egypt, 
 and my signs which I have done among 
 them; that ye may know how that If 
 amthe Lorp. — 
 
 And Moses and Aaron came in 
 unto Pharaoh, and said unto him, Thus 
 saith the Lorp God of the Hebrews, 
 How long wilt thou refuse to humble 
 thyself before me? let my people go, 
 that they may serve me. 
 
 4 Else, if thou refuse to let my 
 people go, behold, to morrow will I 
 bring the ?locusts into thy coast: 
 
 5 And they shall cover the ‘face 
 of the earth, that one cannot be able 
 to see the earth: and they shall eat 
 the residue of that which is escaped, 
 
 which he and his people attached most im- 
 portance had been spared in the visitation. 
 ‘The word ‘‘1” is emphatic, equivalent to 
 ‘cas for me I have,” &c. 
 
 2. thou} Moses is addressed as the re- 
 presentative of Israel. 
 
 wrought] ‘The Hebrew word is not very 
 commonly used. It implies an action which 
 brings shame and disgrace upon its objects, 
 making them, so to speak, playthings of di- 
 vine power (oyna, LXX. éumématxa). Ges. 
 ‘ Thes.’ interprets it with reference to 1 Sam. 
 xxxi. 4, ‘‘animum explevit illudendo,” which 
 appears to be the true meaning in this passage, 
 
 ‘as in most others. 
 
 4. the locusts] ‘The locust is less com- 
 
 mon in Egypt than in many eastern countries, 
 
 yet it is well known, and dreaded as the most 
 terrible of scourges. In the papyrus Anast. 
 V. p. Io, it is mentioned as a common enemy 
 of the husbandmen. Niebuhr and Forskal wit- 
 nessed two visitations; Tischendorf describes 
 one of unusual extent in March which covered 
 the whole country: they come generally from 
 the western deserts, but sometimes from the 
 east and the south-east. Denon saw an enor- 
 mous cloud of locusts in May, which came 
 from the east, settling upon every blade of 
 grass, and after destroying the vegetation of a 
 district passing on to another. No less than 
 nine names are given to the locust in the Bible, 
 the word here used is the most common; it 
 signifies ‘‘multitudinous,” and whenever it 
 occurs reference is made to its terrible devas- 
 tations. See notes on Leviticus xi. 12. 
 
 5. the face] Literally ‘‘the eye of the 
 earth,” alluding doubtless to the darkness when, 
 as Olivier describes it, ‘‘the whole atmosphere 
 
 EO DSi 2S 
 
 which remaineth unto you from the 
 hail, and shall eat every tree which 
 groweth for you out of the field: 
 
 - 6 And they shall fill thy houses, 
 and the houses of all thy servants, and 
 the houses of all the Egyptians; which 
 neither thy fathers, nor thy fathers’ 
 fathers have seen, since the day that 
 they were upon the earth unto this 
 day. And he turned himself, and went 
 out from Pharaoh. 
 
 7 And Pharaoh’s servants said unto 
 him, How long shall this man be a 
 snare unto us! let the men go, that 
 they may serve the Lorn their God: 
 knowest thou not yet that Egypt is 
 destroyed? 
 
 8 And Moses. and Aaron were 
 brought again unto Pharaoh: and he 
 
 is filled on all sides and to a great height by 
 an innumerable quantity of these insects—in 
 a moment all the fields are covered by them.” 
 
 shall eat every tree| Not only the leaves, 
 but the branches and even the wood are at- 
 tacked and devoured. Pliny says, XI. 29, 
 ‘¢ omnia morsu erodentes et fores quoque tec- 
 torum.” The Egyptians were passionately 
 fond of trees; in hieroglyphics one of the 
 most ancient names of Egypt is ‘‘the land of 
 the sycomore:” see De Rougé, ‘ Recherches,’ 
 p- 80, under the sth dynasty; Saneha, i.e. 
 ‘son of the sycomore,” is found as a name 
 given to a court favourite under the rath dy- 
 nasty. ‘The widow of Thotmes II. a few 
 years after his death, imported a large number 
 of trees from Arabia Felix; a singular coin- 
 cidence if, as seems probable, that was the 
 date of the Exodus. See Duemichen’s ‘ Fleet 
 of an Egyptian Queen.’ 
 
 6. fill thy houses] ‘The terraces, courts, 
 and even the inner apartments are said to be 
 filled in a moment by a locust storm. Cf. 
 Joel ii. 9. 
 
 7. Pharaoh's servants] ‘This marks a very 
 considerable advance in the transaction. For 
 the first time the officers of Pharaoh intervene 
 before the scourge is inflicted, shewing at once 
 their belief in the threat, and their special 
 terror of the infliction. Pharaoh also for the 
 first time takes measures to prevent the evil; 
 he does not indeed send for Moses and Aaron, 
 but he permits them to be brought into his 
 presence, 
 
 let the men go] i.e. the men only, not all 
 the people; the officers assumed that the women 
 and children would remain as hostages; and 
 Pharaoh was now ready to consent to the 
 proposal so limited. 
 
 287 
 
288 
 
 t Heb. 
 who and 
 who, &c. 
 
 said unto them, Go, serve the Lorp 
 your God: but ‘who are they that 
 shall go? ; 
 
 g And Moses said, We will go with 
 our young and with our old, with our 
 sons and with our daughters, with 
 our flocks and with our herds will we 
 go; for we must hold a feast unto the 
 Lorp. 
 
 10 And he said unto them, Let the 
 Lorp be so with you, as | will let you 
 go, and your little ones: look to zt; 
 for evil zs before you. 
 
 11 Not so: go now ye that are 
 men, and serve the Lorn; for that 
 ye did desire. And they were driven 
 out from Pharaoh’s presence. 
 
 12 4 And the Lorp said unto Mo- 
 ses, Stretch out thine hand over the 
 land of Egypt for the locusts, that 
 they may come up upon the land 
 of Egypt, and eat every herb of 
 the land, even all that the hail hath 
 left. 
 
 13 And Moses stretched forth his 
 rod over the land of Egypt, and the 
 Lorp brought an east wind upon the 
 land all that day, and all that night; 
 
 9. with our young, &c.] The demand was 
 not contrary to Egyptian usage, as great festi- 
 vals were kept by the whole population: see 
 Herod. 11. 58, ‘*the numbers who attend (i.e. 
 the festival at Bubastis) counting only the 
 men and women, and omitting the children, 
 amounted, according to the native reports, 
 to seven hundred thousand.” 
 
 10. evil is before you] The meaning is 
 ambiguous. It may be a threat, but most 
 commentators (LXX., Vulg., Rosen., Kno- 
 bel, &c.) render it, ‘‘for your intentions are 
 evil,” and this doubtless expresses the exact 
 motive of the king: great as the possible in- 
 fliction might be, he held it to be a less evil 
 than the loss of so large a population. 
 
 13. an east wind | Moses is careful to record 
 the natural and usual cause of the evil, porten- 
 tous as it was in its extent, and in its connec- 
 tion with his denouncement. ‘The east wind 
 sometimes brings locusts into Egypt, see note 
 on wv. 4, nor is there any reason for departing 
 from the common meaning of the word which 
 is given in the Authorised Version. 
 
 14. went up| The expression is exact 
 and graphic; at a distance the locusts ap- 
 pear hanging, as it were, like a heavy cloud 
 
 EXODUS AX: 
 
 [v. 9—r109. 
 
 and when it was morning, the east 
 wind brought the locusts. 
 
 14, And the locusts went up over 
 all the land of Egypt, and rested in 
 all the coasts of Egypt: very grievous 
 were they; before them there were no 
 such locusts as they, neither after 
 them shall be such. 
 
 15 For they covered the face of the 
 whole earth, so that the land was 
 darkened; and they did eat every herb 
 of the land, and all the fruit of the 
 trees which the hail had left: and 
 there remained not any green thing 
 in the trees, or in the herbs of the 
 field, through all the land of Egypt. 
 
 16 4 Then Pharaoh tcalled for t Heb. | 
 
 hastened 
 call, 
 
 Moses and Aaron in haste; and he zw 
 said, I have sinned against the Lorp 
 your God, and against you. 
 
 17 Now therefore forgive, I pray 
 thee, my sin only this once, and in- 
 treat the Lorp your God, that he may 
 take away from me this death only. 
 
 18 And he went out from Pharaoh, 
 and intreated the Lorp. 
 
 1g And the Lorp turned a mighty 
 strong west wind, which took away 
 
 over the land; as they approach they seem to 
 rise, and they fill the atmosphere overhead on 
 their arrival. 
 
 over all the land| The expression may be 
 taken in the broadest sense. Accounts are 
 given by Major Moore of a cloud of locusts 
 extending over 500 miles, and so compact 
 while on the wing that, like an eclipse, it com- 
 pletely hid the sun. Brown states (‘Travels in. 
 Africa’), that an area of nearly two thousand 
 square miles was literally covered by them. 
 This passage describes a swarm unprecedented 
 in extent. 
 
 17. this death only] Pliny calls locusts 
 ‘*Pestis ire Deorum,” a pestilence brought 
 on by divine wrath. Pharaoh now recognizes 
 the justice of his servants’ apprehensions, v. 7. 
 
 19. vest wind] Literally ‘‘a sea wind,” 
 which in Palestine of course is from the west: 
 but in this passage it may, and probably does, 
 denote a wind blowing from the sea on the 
 north-west of Egypt. A direct westerly wind 
 would come from the Lybian desert and be 
 far less effectual than one rushing transversely 
 over the whole surface of lower Egypt (which 
 was doubtless the main centre of the visita- 
 tion), and driving the locusts into the Red 
 
isd, 18. 
 
 2 J) nl 
 
 vy. 20—29.| 
 
 the locusts, and ‘cast them into the 
 Red sea; there remained not one 
 locust in all the coasts of Egypt. 
 
 20 But the Lorp hardened Pha- 
 raoh’s heart, so that he would not let 
 the children of Israel go. 
 
 21 | And the Lorp said unto Mo- 
 ses, Stretch out thine hand toward 
 heaven, that there may be darkness 
 over the land of Egypt, ‘even dark- 
 ness which may be felt. 
 
 22, And Moses stretched forth his 
 hand toward heaven; and there was 
 a thick darkness in all the land of 
 Egypt three days: 
 
 23 They saw not one another, nei- 
 ther rose any from his place for three 
 days: “but all the children of Israel 
 had light in their dwellings. 
 
 24 ™ And Pharaoh called unto 
 Moses, and said, Go ye, serve the 
 Lorp; only Jet your flocks and your 
 
 Sea. ‘The rendering ‘‘cast” in the text is 
 preferable to that in the margin; the Hebrew 
 word means to drive in by a sharp stroke or 
 blow. 
 
 Red sea] ‘The Hebrew has the Sea of Suph: 
 the exact meaning of Suph is disputed. Gese- 
 nius renders it ‘‘rush” or ‘‘sea-weed;” but it 
 is probably an Egyptian word. A sea-weed 
 resembling wool is thrown up abundantly on 
 the shores of the Red Sea. ‘The origin of the 
 modern name is uncertain. The Egyptians 
 called it the sea of Punt, i.e, of Arabia. The 
 sudden and complete disappearance of the 
 locusts, generally effected by a strong wind 
 (gregatim sublatz vento in maria aut stagna 
 decidunt, Plin. ‘H. N.’ x1. 35), is a pheno- 
 menon scarcely less remarkable than their 
 coming; the putrefaction of such immense 
 masses not unfrequently causes a terrible pesti- 
 lence near the coasts of the sea into which 
 they fall. 
 
 The Ninth Plague. 
 
 21. darkness] This infliction was specially 
 calculated to aftect the spirits of the Egyp- 
 tians, whose chief object of worship was Ra, 
 the Sun-god, and its suddenness and severity 
 in connection with the act of Moses mark it 
 as a preternatural withdrawal of light. Yet 
 it has an analogy in physical phenomena. 
 After the vernal equinox the south-west wind 
 from the desert blows some fifty days, see 
 
 note on v. 12, not however continuously but 
 
 at intervals, lasting generally some two or three 
 days. (Thus Lane, Willman and others 
 
 Vot. I. 
 
 BXODUsS,* X. 
 
 herds be stayed: let your little ones 
 also go with you. 
 
 25 And Moses said, Thou must 
 
 give tus also sacrifices and burnt t Heb. 
 
 into our 
 
 offerings, that we may sacrifice unto sands, 
 
 the Lorp our God. 
 
 26 Our cattle also shall go with 
 us; there shall not an hoof be left 
 behind; for thereof must we take to 
 serve the Lorp our God; and we 
 know not with what we must serve 
 the Lorn, until we come thither. 
 
 27 4 But the Lorp hardened Pha- 
 raoh’s heart, and he would not let 
 them go. 
 
 28 And Pharaoh said unto him, 
 Get thee from me, take heed to thy- 
 self, see my face no more; for in that 
 day thou seest my face thou shalt die. 
 
 29 And Moses said, Thou hast 
 spoken well, I will see thy face again 
 no more. 
 
 quoted by Knobel.) It fills the atmosphere 
 with dense masses of fine sand, bringing on 
 a darkness far deeper than that of our worst 
 fogs in winter. While it lasts no man ‘¢ rises 
 from his place; men and beasts hide them- 
 selves: people shut themselves up in the in- 
 nermost apartments or vaults.” ‘¢So satu- 
 rated is the air with the sand that it seems 
 to lose its transparency, so that artificial light 
 ss of little use.” ‘The expression ‘‘even dark- 
 ness which might be felt,” has a special ap= 
 plication to a darkness produced by such a 
 cause. ‘The consternation of Pharaoh proves 
 that, familiar as he may have been with the 
 phenomenon, no previous occurrence had 
 prepared him for its intensity and duration, 
 and that he recognized it as a supernatural 
 visitation. ‘The rendering, which has been 
 questioned, is correct, LXX. Wnradnrov 
 oxéros, Vulg. tam dense ut palpari queant. 
 Thus Rosen., Maurer, Knobel, &c. 
 
 23. had light in their dwellings] The 
 sandstorm, if such were the cause, may not 
 have extended to the district of Goshen; but 
 the expression clearly denotes a miraculous 
 intervention, whether accomplished or not by 
 natural agencies. 
 
 24. your flocks and your herds] Pharaoh 
 still exacts what would of course be a complete 
 security for their return: but the demand was 
 wholly incompatible with the object assigned 
 for the journey into the wilderness. Every 
 gradation in the yielding of Pharaoh and in 
 the demands of Moses is distinctly noted: but 
 it should be observed that these do not yet 
 
 rT 
 
 289 
 
290 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 1 God’s message to the Israelites to borrow 
 jewels of their neighbours. 4 Moses threaten- 
 eth Pharaoh with the death of the firstborn. 
 
 ND the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 Yet will I bring one plague 
 
 more upon Pharaoh, and upon Egypt; 
 afterwards he will let you go hence: 
 when he shall let you go, he shall 
 surely thrust you out hence altogether. 
 2 Speak now in the ears of the 
 people, and let every man borrow of 
 
 extend to a permission to emigrate from the 
 country. Had Pharaoh even then yielded he 
 could have taken measures to compel them to 
 come back, a result only at last rendered im- 
 possible by the destruction of the whole army 
 stationed on the frontier of lower Egypt. 
 
 Cuap. XI. 1. the Lorp said}. Or ‘the 
 Lord had said.” Commentators. generally 
 agree that the first three verses of this chapter 
 are parenthetical. ‘The most probable account 
 of their insertion in this place appears to be 
 that, before Moses relates the last warning 
 given to Pharaoh, he feels it right to recall to 
 his readers’ minds the revelation and command 
 which had been previously given to him by 
 the Lord. ‘Thus Aben-Ezra, who proposes 
 the rendering ‘‘had said,” which is adopted 
 by Rosenmiiller, Keil, Kalisch, Ranke, Smith 
 (‘ Pentateuch,’ pp. 557—-560), who com- 
 pletely disposes of the objections of German 
 and English critics. No grammatical objec- 
 tion is made to this construction, which is 
 common in the Old Testament and belongs 
 to the simple and inartificial style of the 
 Pentateuch. ‘The command may have been 
 given immediately before the last interview with 
 Pharaoh; such repetition when a work is on 
 the eve of accomplishment is customary in 
 Holy Writ. Here it accounts ‘‘both for the 
 confidence with which Moses, remembering 
 the words of Jehovah, had just told the king 
 that he would no more see his face, and for 
 the prediction which immediately follows, that 
 Pharaoh’s court would come humbly to. en- 
 treat him to depart.”’ Smith, /. c. 
 
 when he shall let you go, &c.| ‘The original is 
 obscure, but it may probably be rendered when 
 he lets yougoaltogether he will surely 
 thrust you out hence; see note below. 
 The meaning is, when at last he lets you de- 
 part with children, flocks, herds, and all your 
 possessions, he will compel you to depart in 
 haste. ‘This part of the command is important, 
 as shewing that Moses was already aware that 
 the last plague would be followed by an im- 
 mediate departure, and, therefore, that mea- 
 sures had probably been taken to prepare the 
 
 ERO, Uiaae i 
 
 Lv. 1-4. 
 
 his neighbour, and every woman of 
 
 Om 
 
 her neighbour, “jewels of silver, and ¢ chap. 3 
 2. 
 
 jewels of gold. 
 3 And the Lorp gave the people 
 favour in the sight of the Egyptians. 
 
 & 12. 35. 
 
 Moreover the man ? Moses was very ? Ecclus. 
 
 great in the land of Egypt, in the 45- 
 
 sight of Pharaoh’s servants, and in the 
 sight of the people. 
 4 And Moses said, Thus saith the 
 
 Lorp, ‘About midnight will I go out : chem i: 
 
 into the midst of Egypt: 
 
 Israelites for the journey. In fact on each 
 occasion when Pharaoh relented for a season, 
 immediate orders would of course be issued 
 by Moses to the heads of the people, who 
 were thus repeatedly brought into a state of 
 more or less complete organization for the 
 final movement. See Introduction. 
 
 2. every man| In ch, iii. 22 women only 
 were named; the command is more explicit 
 when the time is come for its execution. 
 
 borrow] Or ‘‘demand.” See note on ch, 
 Ill. 22. 
 
 8. gave the people favour| See note on 
 ill, 22, 
 
 Moreover the man Moses was very great] 
 No. objection would have been taken to this 
 statement had it been found in any other 
 book. It does not assert, however, what was 
 perfectly true, that Moses was a great man by 
 reason of personal qualifications, but that he 
 was great in the estimation of Pharaoh, of his 
 servants, and of all the Egyptians. ‘This has 
 a very important bearing upon the narrative, 
 shewing the effect produced upon the Egyp- 
 tians by the previous visitations, and by the 
 conduct of Moses, especially by the care he 
 had taken to warn them, and, so far as was 
 practicable, to save them from suffering. See 
 ch. ix. 19, 20. It accounts for their ready 
 compliance with the demand of the Israelites. 
 God gave them a kindly feeling, by an in- 
 ward act, not changing their nature, but 
 eliciting their better feelings, the sense of obli- 
 gation, and gratitude for benefits which Dio- 
 dorus specially mentions as a characteristic of 
 the Egyptians. The reasons above assigned 
 appear sufficient to account for the intro- 
 duction of these verses, which undoubtedly 
 interrupt the narrative; but there would be no 
 objection in point of principle to the sup- 
 position that they may have been inserted 
 either by Moses at a later period, when he 
 probably put together and revised the detached 
 portions of the books; or by one of his younger 
 contemporaries, who must have been equally 
 conversant with the facts, and aware of the 
 
 I. 
 
EXODUS: XE. 
 
 - 5 And all the firstborn in the land 
 
 of Egypt shall die, from the firstborn 
 
 ~_ of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, 
 
 even unto the firstborn of the maid- 
 
 servant that zs behind the mill; and 
 all the firstborn of beasts. 
 
 6 And there shall be a great cry 
 
 ¥. 5—10.| 291 
 
 8 And all these thy servants shall 
 come down unto me, and bow down 
 themselves unto me, saying, Get thee 
 out, and all the people ‘that follow t Heb. 
 thee: and after that I will go out. iy feen 
 And he went out from Pharaoh in ta t Heb. 
 
 great anger. Gath Le 
 
 anger. 
 
 throughout all the land of Egypt, 
 such as there was none like it, nor 
 shall be like it any more. 
 
 But against any of the children 
 of Israel shall not a dog move his 
 tongue, against man or beast: that 
 ye may know how that the Lorp 
 doth put a difference between the 
 Egyptians and Israel. 
 
 importance of the statement in its bearings 
 wpon the whole transaction. 
 
 4. And Moses said| The following words 
 must be read in immediate connection with 
 the last verse of the preceding chapter. It is 
 not there stated that Moses left the presence of 
 Pharaoh; this passage tells us what took place 
 after his declaration that this would be his last 
 interview. 
 
 About midnight| ‘This marks the hour, but 
 not the day, on which the visitation would 
 take place. ‘There may have been, and pro- 
 bably was, an interval of some days, during 
 which preparations might be made both for 
 the celebration of the Passover, and the de- 
 parture of the Israelites: in the meantime 
 Egypt remained under the shadow of the 
 menace. 
 
 5. the firstborn] ‘Two points are to be 
 noticed: x, The extent of the visitation: the 
 whole land suffers in the persons of its first- 
 born, nat merely for the guilt of the sovereign, 
 but for the actual participation of the people 
 in the crime of infanticide. 2, The limitation. 
 
 NOTE 
 
 ' The force of the word »55 appears to 
 have been overlooked by our translators, who 
 misplace it, as also by the Vulgate, which 
 takes no notice of it. ‘The Targum of Onke- 
 los renders it correctly x3. The LXX, 
 
 And the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 Pharaoh shall not hearken unto you; 
 that my wonders may be multiplied 
 in the land of Egypt. 
 
 to And Moses and Aaron did all 
 these wonders before Pharaoh: and 
 the Lorp hardened Pharaoh’s heart, 
 so that he would not let the children 
 of Israel go out of his land. 
 
 Pharaoh’s command had been fo slay all the 
 male children of the'Israelites, one child only 
 in each Egyptian family was to die. If Thot- 
 mes II. was the Pharaoh (see Appendix) the 
 visitation fell with special severity on his 
 family. He left no son, but was succeeded by 
 his widow. 
 
 the mill} The mill used by the Israelites, 
 and probably by the Egyptians, consisted of 
 two circular stones, one fixed in the ground, 
 the other turned by a handle. ‘The work of 
 grinding was extremely laborious, and per- 
 formed by women of the lowest rank. 
 
 firstborn of beasts| ‘This visitation has a 
 peculiar force in reference to the worship of 
 beasts, which was universal in Egypt; each 
 nome having its own sacred animal, adored as 
 a manifestation or representative of the local 
 tuteiary deity. 
 
 8. in great anger} Orin heat of anger, 
 as in the margin. 
 
 9,10. ‘These two verses refer to the whole 
 preceding narrative, and mark the close of one 
 principal division of the book. 
 
 on wv. I. 
 
 ody mavri: the Syriac less accurately, ‘‘all of 
 you.” It reads also in both clauses, ‘I will 
 dismiss you.” ‘The Arabic forcibly and cor- 
 
 rectly das, 
 
 T2 
 
29 
 
 2 EXO DUST IIE 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 1 The beginning of the year is changed. 3 The 
 passover is instituted. 11 The rite of the 
 passover. 15 Unleavened bread. 29 The 
 firstborn are slain, 31 The Israelites are 
 driven out of the land. 37 They come to 
 Succoth. 43 The ordinance of the passover. 
 
 ND the Lorp spake unto Moses 
 and Aaron in the land of Egypt, 
 
 saying, 
 
 2 This month shall be unto you 
 the beginning of months: it shall be 
 the first month of the year to you. 
 
 3 4 Speak ye unto all the congre- 
 
 Cuap, XII. 1. in the land of Egypt| It 
 seems evident that this verse, and consequently 
 the rest of the chapter, was written some time 
 after the Exodus, probably when Moses put 
 together the portions of the book towards the 
 end of his life. ‘The statements that these in- 
 structions were given in the land of Egypt, 
 and that they were given to Moses and Aaron, 
 are important: the one marks the peculiar 
 dignity of this ordinance, which was established 
 before the Sinaitic code, the other marks the 
 distinction between Moses and Aaron and all 
 other prophets. They alone, as Aben-Ezra 
 observes, were prophets of the Law, i.e. no 
 law was promulgated by any other prophets. 
 
 2. This month] ‘The name of the month, 
 Abib, is given xii, 4. It was called by the 
 later Hebrews Nisan, a name found in early 
 Syrian inscriptions, De Vogué, ‘Syrie cen- 
 trale,’ p. 5, and derived from the Nisannu of 
 the Assyrians and Babylonians, with whom it 
 was the first month of the year. It corresponds 
 nearly to our April, since the last full moon 
 in March or the first in April fell in the 
 middle of the month. It is clear that in 
 this passage the Israelites are directed to 
 take Abib henceforth as the beginning of the 
 year; the year previously began with the 
 month Tisri, when the harvest was gathered 
 in; see xxiii. 16, ‘They do not appear to 
 have adopted the Egyptian division, in which 
 the fixed year began in June, at the rise of 
 the Nile. The injunction touching Abib or 
 Nisan referred only to religious rites; in other 
 affairs they retained the old arrangement, 
 even in the beginning of the Sabbatic year; see 
 Levit. xxv. 9; and Josephus, ‘Ant.’ I, 25. 9. 
 The assumption that an ancient festival was 
 previously held at this season to celebrate the 
 ripening of the wheat has no grounds in 
 history or tradition, 
 
 3. a lamb| The Hebrew word, used in 
 the same way in Arabic and Chaldee, is 
 general, meaning either a sheep or goat, male 
 or female, and of any age; the age and sex are 
 therefore specially defined in the following 
 
 [v. 1—5. 
 
 gation of Israel, saying, In the tenth - 
 day of this month they shall take to 
 
 them every man a ‘lamb, according ! 0, diz, 
 
 to the house of their fathers, a lamb 
 for an house: 
 
 4 And if the household be too little 
 for the lamb, let him and his neigh- 
 bour next unto his house take zt ac- 
 cording to the number of the souls; 
 every man according to his eating 
 shall make your count for the lamb. 
 
 5 Your lamb shall be without + Heb. 
 
 son of a 
 
 blemish, a male 'of the first year: ye yeay. 
 
 verse. The direction to select the lamb on 
 the tenth day, the fourth day before it was 
 offered, is generally assumed to have applied 
 to the first institution only, but there is no 
 indication of this in the text, and it seems more 
 probable that the injunction was intended to 
 secure due care in the preparation for the 
 greatest national festival, ‘The custom cer- 
 tainly fell into desuetude at a later period, 
 but probably not before the destruction of the 
 Temple. The later Targum, which asserts 
 that the rule was not intended to be of per- 
 manent obligation, records the traditions of 
 Rabbins of the sixth century, 
 
 the house of their fathers| Lit. a house of 
 fathers, or parents; z.e. for each family. 
 
 4. if the household be too little, &c.| ‘The 
 meaning is clear, if there be not persons 
 enough to consume a lamb at one meal: 
 tradition specifies ten as the least number; 
 thus Josephus says, not less than ten attend 
 this sacrifice, and twenty are generally assem-= 
 bled, ‘De B. J.’ vi. 9. 3. The later Targum 
 paraphrases the passage thus: ‘‘ If the men of 
 the household be less than ten in number.” 
 There is, however, no indication of such a 
 rule earlier than Josephus, and it was pro- 
 bably left altogether to the discretion of the 
 heads of families. ‘The women and children 
 were certainly not excluded, though the Rab- 
 bins held their attendance to be unnecessary, 
 and the Karaites permitted none but adult 
 males to be partakers. 
 
 The last clause should be rendered: ‘‘let 
 him and his neighbour who is near to his 
 house take according to the number of souls, 
 each man according to his eating ye shail 
 count for the lamb.” Our Version only re- 
 quires the insertion of ye, or you, before ‘‘shall 
 make your count.” See note below. 
 
 5. without blemish] ‘This is in accordance 
 with the general rule laid down in Levit. 
 XXli, 20: so also is the choice of a male, Levit, 
 i. 3: although in this case there is a special 
 reason, since the lamb was in place’ of the 
 firstborn male in each household. ‘The re- 
 
 4 > 
 
MINS. 
 
 v. 6—8.] 
 
 shall take zt out from the sheep, or 
 from the goats: 
 
 6 And ye shall keep it up until the 
 fourteenth day of the same month: 
 and the whole assembly of the con- 
 gregation of Israel shall kill it tin the 
 evening. 
 
 7 And they shall take of the 
 
 BES ID U Sy XLT. 
 
 blood, and strike zt on the two side 
 posts and on the upper door post 
 of the houses, wherein they shall 
 eat it. 
 
 8 And they shall eat the flesh in 
 that night, roast with fire, and un- 
 leavened bread; and with bitter herbs 
 they shall eat it. 
 
 i ttt ty 
 
 striction to the first year is peculiar, and 
 refers apparently to the condition of perfect 
 innocence in the antitype, the Lamb of 
 God. 
 
 or from the goats| There is no indication of 
 a preference, but the Hebrews have generally 
 held that a lamb was the more acceptable 
 offering. 
 
 6. ye shall keep it up| The Hebrew implies 
 that it was to be kept with great care, which 
 appears to be the meaning of the expression 
 “keep it tp.” . 
 
 until the fourteenth day] It should be 
 observed that the offering of our Lord on 
 the selfsame day is an important point in 
 determining the typical character of the trans- 
 action, Masius on Josh, v. ro quotes a re- 
 markable passage from the Talmud: ‘It was 
 a famous and old opinion among the ancient 
 Jews that the day of the new year which 
 was the beginning of the Israelites’ deliverance 
 out of Egypt should in future time be the 
 beginning of the redemption by the Messiah.” 
 
 in the evening] ‘The Hebrew has between 
 the two evenings. ‘The meaning of the 
 expression is disputed. The most probable 
 explanation is that it includes the time from 
 afternoon, or early eventide, until sunset. 
 This accords with the ancient custom of the 
 Hebrews, who slew the paschal lamb imme- 
 diately after the offering of the daily sacrifice, 
 which on the day of the passover took place a 
 little earlier than usual, between two and three 
 p-m, This would allow about two hours and 
 a half for slaying and preparing all the lambs. 
 It is clear that they would not wait until 
 sunset, at which time the evening meal would 
 take place. ‘This interpretation is supported 
 by Rashi, Kimchi, Bochart, Lightfoot, Cleri- 
 cus, and Patrick. Thus Josephus: ‘they offer 
 this sacrifice from the ninth to the eleventh 
 hour.” ‘The Greeks had the same idiom, dis- 
 tinguishing between the early and late even- 
 ing. Other interpreters understand it to 
 mean the interval between sunset and total 
 darkness, an exceedingly short time in the 
 East, and quite insufficient for the work. 
 Rosenmiiller shews from the Talmud that 
 the twilight as strictly defined did not last 
 longer than it would take to walk half a mile, 
 ie, about ten minutes, If, moreover, the 
 
 lamb were slain after sunset, it would not 
 have been on the fourteenth day of the month, 
 since the day was reckoned from sunset to 
 sunset. Knobel observes that the expression 
 is peculiar to the so-called Elohist; it is in fact 
 peculiar to the Pentateuch, and its meaning 
 was evidently ascertained only by conjecture 
 at a later period, It is to be observed that 
 the slaying of the lamb on the former hypo- 
 thesis coincides exactly with the death of our 
 Saviour, at the ninth hour of the day. 
 
 7. the upper door post] Or lintel, as 
 it is rendered v. 23. ‘This meaning is gene- 
 rally accepted, but the word occurs only in 
 this passage ; it is derived from a root which 
 means to ‘‘look out,” and may signify a lat- 
 tice above the door: thus Aben-Ezra and Ro- 
 senmiiller. ‘This direction was understood by 
 the Hebrews to apply only to the first Pass- 
 over: it was certainly not adopted in Pales- 
 tine. The meaning of the sprinkling of blood 
 is hardly open to question. It was a repre- 
 sentation of the offering of the life, substi- 
 tuted for that of the firstborn in each house, 
 as an expiatory and vicarious sacrifice. 
 
 8. in that night] The night is thus clearly 
 distinguished from the evening when the lamb 
 was slain. It was slain before sunset, on the 
 r4th, and eaten after sunset, the beginning of 
 the rs5th. 
 
 with fire] Among various reasons given 
 for this injunction the most probable and 
 satisfactory seems to be the special sanctity 
 attached to fire from the first institution of 
 sacrifice. ‘The memory of this primeval sanc- 
 tity is preserved by universal tradition, e.g. 
 among the Aryans, as is shewn by the hymns 
 in the Rig Veda to Agni, the fire-god, and 
 by the whole system of the Zend Avesta. 
 
 and unleavened bread| Or,and they shall 
 eat unleavened cakes with bitter 
 herbs. See note below. The Hebrew word 
 is certain in meaning, but of doubtful origin ; 
 see note below. Like many others in this 
 account it is archaic, found only in the Pen- 
 tateuch, except in passages which refer to the 
 Passover. ‘The importance of the injunction 
 is admitted; the unleavened cakes give one 
 of the two general designations to the festival, 
 This may in part be accounted for by its 
 being a lasting memorial of the circumstances 
 
 293 
 
2) 
 
 94 
 
 g Eat not of it raw, nor sodden at 
 all with water, but roast with fire; 
 his head with his legs, and with the 
 purtenance thereof. 
 
 10 And ye shall let nothing of it 
 
 EXO DUS! ek 
 
 [v. 9—11. 
 
 remain until the morning; and that 
 which remaineth of it until the morn- 
 ing ye shall burn with fire. é 
 
 11 @ And thus shall ye eat it; with 
 your loins girded, your shoes on your 
 
 of the hasty departure, allowing no time for 
 the process of leavening: but the meaning dis- 
 cerned by St Paul, 1 Cor. v. 7, and recognized 
 by the Church in all ages, was assuredly 
 implied, though not expressly declared in the 
 original institution; and though our Lord 
 may not directly refer to the Passover, yet 
 His words, Matt. xiii. 33, are conclusive as 
 to the symbolism of leaven. 
 
 bitter herbs| ‘The word occurs only here 
 and in Numbers ix. 11, in reference to herbs, 
 ‘The symbolical reference to the previous suf- 
 ferings of the Israelites is generally admitted. 
 Various kinds of bitter herbs are enumerated 
 in the Mishna; but the expression should be 
 taken generally; the bitter herbs of Egypt 
 would of course differ in kind from those of 
 other countries where the Passover was to 
 be eaten. 
 
 9. raw] Another obsolete word, proba- 
 bly Egyptian, found only in this passage: the 
 corresponding root in Arabic means ‘“ half- 
 cooked,” and this appears to be the sense 
 here: raw meat was not likely to be eaten, 
 though some interpretors find here a reference 
 to the duodayia, ‘feasting on raw food,” in 
 some Gentile festivals, The prohibition of 
 eating it sodden with water has been consi- 
 dered in reference to ‘‘roast with fire:” it 
 was probably more common to seethe than to 
 roast meat; hence the regrets expressed by 
 the Israelites for the seething pots of Egypt; 
 on other occasions the flesh of sin and peace- 
 offerings, whether consumed by the people or 
 the priests, was ordered to be sodden: see 
 Lev. vi. 28; Num. vi. 19. 
 
 sodden...with water] or “‘ sodden,” omitting 
 ‘water,” which is added in Hebrew because 
 the word in that language may be used either 
 of roasting (as in 2 Chron. xxxy. 13) or 
 boiling. 
 
 the purtenance thereof | or its intestines, 
 This verse directs that the lamb should be 
 roasted and placed on the table whole. No 
 bone was to be broken (see v, 46, and Num. 
 ix, 12, an injunction which the LXX. insert 
 in the next verse). According to Rashi and 
 other Rabbins the bowels were taken out, 
 washed and then replaced, ‘The Talmud 
 prescribes the form of the oven of earthen- 
 ware, in which the lamb was roasted, open 
 above and below with a grating for the fire, 
 Lambs and sheep are roasted whole in Persia, 
 nearly inthe same manner, ‘Thevenot describes 
 the process, Vol. 11. p. 180, ed. 1674, 
 
 This entire consumption of the lamb con- 
 stitutes one marked difference between the 
 Passover and all other sacrifices, in which 
 either a part or the whoie was burned, and 
 thus offered directly to God. ‘The whole sub- 
 stance of the sacrificed lamb was to enter 
 into the substance of the people, the blood 
 only excepted, which was sprinkled as a pro- 
 pitiatory and sacrificial offering. Another 
 point of subordinate importance is noticed. 
 The lamb was slain and the blood sprinkled 
 by the head of each family: no separate priest- 
 hood as yet existed in Israel; its functions be- 
 longed from the beginning to the father of the 
 family: when the priesthood was instituted the 
 slaying of the lamb still devoived on the heads 
 of families, though the blood was sprinkled on 
 the altar by the priests; an act which essen- 
 tially belonged to their office. ‘The typical 
 character of this part of the transaction is 
 clear. Our Lord was offered and His blood 
 shed as an expiatory and propitiatory sacrifice, 
 but His whole humanity is transfused spwi- 
 tually and effectually into His Church, an effect 
 which is at once symbolized and assured in 
 Holy Communion, the Christian Passover, 
 
 10. And ye shall iet nothing, &c.] ‘This was 
 afterwards a general law of sacrifices; at once 
 preventing all possibility of profanity, and of 
 superstitious abuse, such as was practised 
 among some ancient heathens, who were wont 
 to reserve a portion of their sacrifices; see 
 Herod, I. 132; and Baruch vi. 28. The in- 
 junction is on both accounts justly applied by 
 our Church to the Eucharist. 
 
 burn with fire} Not being consumed by 
 man, it was thus offered, like other sacrifices, 
 to God, 
 
 11. with your loins girded, &c.| ‘These in- 
 structions are understood by the Jews to 
 apply only to the first Passover, when they 
 belonged to the occasion, ‘There is no trace 
 of their observance at any later time; a strik- 
 ing instance of good sense and power of dis- 
 tinguishing between accidents and substantial 
 characteristics. Each of the directions marks 
 preparation for a journey; the long flowing 
 robes are girded round the loins; shoes or. 
 sandals, not worn in the house or at meals, 
 were fastened on the feet; and the traveliler’s 
 staff was taken in hand, 
 
 the Lorp’s passover] A most important 
 statement. It gives at once the great and 
 most significant name to the whole ordinance. 
 ‘The word Passover renders as nearly as pos- 
 
v. 12—14.] 
 
 feet, and your staff in your hand; 
 and ye shall eat it in haste: it zs the 
 Lorp’s passover. 
 
 12 For I will pass through the land 
 of Egypt this night, and will smite all 
 the firstborn in the land of Egypt, 
 both man and beast; and against all 
 the ‘gods of Egypt I will execute 
 judgment: I am the Lorn. 
 
 13 And the blood shall be to you 
 
 sible the true meaning of the original, of 
 which the primary sense is generally held to 
 be ‘ pass rapidly,” like a bird with outstretched 
 wings, but it undoubtedly includes the idea 
 of sparing. See Ges, ‘‘Thes,’s.v, It is a word 
 which occurs very seldom in other books, 
 twice in one chapter of 1 K., xvili, 21, where 
 it is rendered ‘‘halt,” and seems to mean 
 ‘¢ waver,” flitting like a bird from’branch to 
 branch, and 26, where our A.V. has in the 
 margin ‘leaped up and down.” A passage 
 in Isaiah xxxi, 5 is of more importance, since 
 it combines the two great ideas involved 
 in the word: ‘As birds flying, so will the 
 Lorp of hosts defend Jerusalem; defending 
 also he will deliver it; and PASSING OVER 
 he will preserve it.” ‘This combination of 
 ideas is recognized by nearly all ancient and 
 modern critics. It is remarkable that the 
 word is not found in other Semitic languages, 
 except in passages derived from the Hebrew 
 Bible. In Egyptian the word Pesh, which 
 corresponds to it very nearly in form, means 
 to ‘‘spread out the wings over,” and ‘‘ to pro- 
 tect;” see Brugsch, ‘ D. H.’ p. 512. 
 
 12. I will pass through] The word ren- 
 dered “ pass through” is wholly distinct from 
 that which means “pass over.” ‘The passing 
 through was in judgment, the ‘passing 
 over” in mercy. 
 
 against all the gods of Egypt] ‘The meaning 
 of this and of the corresponding passage, Num. 
 Xxxiii, 4, is undoubtedly that the visitation 
 reached the gods of Egypt, not ‘‘the princes” 
 as in the margin. The true explanation in this 
 case is that in smiting the firstborn of all living 
 beings, man and beast, God smote the objects 
 of Egyptian worship. It is not merely that 
 the bull and cow and goat and ram and cat 
 were worshipped in the principal cities of 
 Egypt as representatives, or, so to speak, in-. 
 carnations, of their deities, but that the wor- 
 ship of beasts was universal; every nome, 
 every town had its sacred animal, including 
 the lowest forms of animal life; the frog, the 
 beetle, being especial objects of reverence as 
 representing the primeval deities of nature. 
 In fact not a single deity of Egypt was 
 unrepresented by some beast. ‘This explana- 
 tion, which is adopted by many critics, e.g. 
 
 EMODUSAH AIT 
 
 for a token upon the houses where ye 
 are: and when I see the blood, I will 
 pass over you, and the plague shall 
 
 not be upon you ‘to destroy you, t Heb. 
 Sor a de- 
 struction. 
 
 when I smite the land of Egypt. 
 
 14 And this day shall be unto you 
 for a memorial; and ye shall keep it 
 a feast to the Lorp throughout your 
 generations; ye shall keep it a feast 
 by an ordinance for ever. 
 
 Michaelis, Rosenmiiller, forces itself upon our 
 minds in proportion to our closer and more 
 accurate knowledge of Egyptian superstitions, 
 It would not however have occurred to an 
 Israelite living in Palestine, and the Rabbins 
 in course of time adopted a different view, 
 which approved itself to some of the early 
 Fathers of the Church, Thus Jerome, ‘ Ep. 
 ad Fabiolam,’ says: ‘‘ The Hebrews think 
 that in the night when the people went forth 
 all the temples in Egypt were destroyed 
 either by earthquake or lightning:” and the 
 second Targum, which gives the traditions of 
 a still later time, asserts that each and every 
 idol was destroyed, The explanation given 
 above meets the whole requirement of the 
 text. 
 
 13. a token] A sign to you, so to speak, 
 a sacramental pledge of mercy. 
 
 I will pass over you] The same word as in 
 v.11. The sense of sparing is clear. The 
 Targum renders it ‘I will spare you,” and 
 the LXX, ‘I will protect you.” 
 
 to destroy you] or ‘‘to destruction,” but 
 our version gives the true sense and may be 
 retained, 
 
 ? 
 
 14, a memorial| The following verses to 
 end of v. 20 contain explicit instructions for 
 the future celebration of the Passover. ‘They 
 appear from v. 17 to have been given to Mo- 
 ses after the departure from Egypt, but are 
 inserted here in their proper place, in connec- 
 tion with the history. ‘The passover was to 
 be a memorial, a commemorative and sacra- 
 mental ordinance of perpetual obligation. As 
 such it has ever been observed by the He- 
 brews. By the Christian it is spiritually ob- 
 served; its full significance is recognized, and 
 all that it foreshadowed is realized, in the 
 Sacrament of Holy Communion. It is not 
 therefore necessary to limit the meaning of 
 the words ‘throughout your generations ” 
 and ‘for ever,” although both expressions are 
 frequently used with reference to an exist- 
 ing dispensation, or to a limited period, 
 
 ye shall keep it a feast] The word chag 
 is used twice in this passage, for ‘‘keep a 
 feast.” The radical meaning is festivity, 
 expressed in outward demonstrations of joy. 
 
 295 
 
296 EXODUS, GY1t. [v. 15—er. . 
 
 15 Seven days shall ye eat unlea- 18 {4 In the first month, on ae | 
 vened bread; even the first day ye 
 shall put away leaven out of your 
 houses: for whosoever eateth leaven- 
 ed bread from the first day until the ; 
 seventh day, that soul shall be cut off . 
 from Israel. , 
 
 16 And in the first day there shall 
 
 be an holy convocation, and in the 
 
 fourteenth day of the month at even, Numb, 
 +7 16. 
 ye shall eat unleavened bread, until 
 the one and twentieth day of the 
 month at even. 
 Ig Seven days shall there be no 
 Jeaven found in your houses: for 
 whosoever eateth that which is lea- 
 
 vened, even that soul shall be cut off 
 
 + Heb. 
 soul. 
 
 seventh day there shall be an holy 
 convocation to you; no manner of 
 work shall be done in them, save that 
 which every ‘man must eat, that only 
 may be done of you. 
 
 17 And ye shall observe the feast 
 of unleavened bread; for in this self- 
 same day have I brought your armies 
 out of the land of Egypt: therefore 
 shall ye observe this day in your gene- 
 rations by an ordinance for ever. 
 
 15. Seven days] From the evening of the 
 fourteenth of Nisan to the end of the azst 
 day. ‘The leaven was removed from the houses 
 before the paschal lamb was slain, in accord- 
 ance with the general instruction, ‘‘ Thou 
 shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with 
 leavened bread;” xxiii. 18. The unleavened 
 bread was an essential element in the celebra- 
 tion: see note on v. 8. ‘The penalty inflicted 
 on those who transgressed the command may 
 be accounted for on the ground that it was 
 an act of rebellion; but additional light is 
 thrown upon it by the typical meaning as- 
 signed to leaven by our Lord, Matt, xvi. 6. 
 The period of seven days does not settle the 
 question as to the previous observance of the 
 week, since this command may have been first 
 given after the institution of the Sabbath, but 
 it adds considerable weight to the argument 
 in its favour, 
 
 16. an holy convocation] This rendering 
 exactly expresses the sense of the original; 
 an assembly called by proclamation for a 
 religious solemnity. ‘The proclamation was 
 directed to be made on some occasions by 
 the blowing of the silver trumpets. See Num, 
 X. 2, 3. In the East the proclamation is made 
 by the Muezzins from the minarets of the 
 mosques, 
 
 save that, &c.| In this the observance of 
 the festival differed from the Sabbath, when 
 the preparation of food was prohibited. ‘The 
 
 ‘same word for ‘* work” is used here and in 
 
 the 4th Commandment: it is very general, 
 and includes all laborious occupation, not 
 however all bodily exercise, as it is under- 
 stood by the stricter sects of the Rabbins, 
 
 from the congregation of Israel, whe- 
 ther he be a stranger, or born in the 
 land. 
 
 20 Ye shall eat nothing leavened; 
 in all your habitations shall ye eat 
 unleavened bread. 
 
 21 | Then Moses called for all the 
 
 elders of Israel, and said unto them, 
 
 Draw out and.-take you a "lamb ac- ! Or, hid. 
 
 cording to your families, and kill the 
 passover. 
 
 17. the feast of unleavened bread lit. ‘‘the 
 unleavened bread;” which may mean either 
 the festival, or the instructions relating to 
 the unleavened bread. ‘The Samaritan Pen- 
 tateuch and the LXX. read ‘‘the precept,” 
 taking a word which differs slightly in form 
 in the unpunctuated Hebrew: but our read- 
 ing and translation are accepted by most 
 critics, 
 
 18. In the first month] or ‘in the beginning,” 
 which may mean at the beginning of the fes- 
 tival, on the evening of the 14th Nisan. 
 Thus the LXX.; but the other ancient ver- 
 sions agree with our own, and their render- 
 ing is supported by Rosenmiiller, 
 
 19. Jeaven] ‘The Hebrew word used here 
 occurs only in the Pentateuch.. It denotes 
 the leaven itself; the word in the next clause, 
 which is also found only in the Pentateuch, 
 means the leavened dough, or bread, 
 
 born in the land] or ‘‘a native of the 
 land ;” a stranger or foreigner might be born 
 in the land, but the word here used means 
 indigenous, belonging to the country in vir- 
 tue of descent, that descent being reckoned 
 from Abraham, to whom Canaan was pro- 
 mised as a perpetual inheritance. The He- 
 brews had no tinge of the opinion which 
 takes human races to be autochthonous, It 
 is indeed remarkable that that opinion was 
 entertained most strongly of old by the Athe- 
 nians, a people whose foreign origin is incon- 
 testably proved by their language, customs 
 and religion. 
 
 21. Then Moses called] From this verse to 
 end of the 28th Moses records the directions 
 
Vv. 22-- 29.] 
 
 2. 22 °And ye shall take a bunch of 
 hyssop, and dip i¢ in the blood that 
 is in the bason, and strike the lintel 
 and the two side posts with the blood 
 that zs in the bason; and none of you 
 shall go out at the door of his house 
 until the morning. 
 
 23 For the Lorp will pass through 
 to smite the Egyptians; and when he 
 seeth the blood upon the lintel, and 
 on the two side posts, the Lorp will 
 pass over the door, and will not suffer 
 the destroyer to come in unto your 
 houses to smite you. 
 
 24 And ye shall observe this thing 
 for an ordinance to thee and to thy 
 sons for ever. 
 
 25 And it shall come to pass, when 
 ye be come to the land which the Lorp 
 
 HPO IS USI COS. 
 
 when your children shall say unto 
 you, What mean ye by this service? 
 
 27 That ye shall say, It zs the 
 sacrifice of the Lorp’s passover, who 
 passed over the houses of the children 
 of Israel in Egypt, when he smote 
 the Egyptians, and delivered our 
 houses. And the people bowed the 
 head and worshipped. 
 
 28 And the children of Israel went 
 away, and did as the Lorp had com- 
 manded Moses and Aaron, so did 
 they. 
 
 29 { “And it came to pass, that at © chap. =. 
 
 midnight the Lorp smote all the“ 
 
 firstborn in the land of Egypt, ¢ from ¢ Wisd. :8. 
 II. 
 
 the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on 
 his throne unto the firstborn of the 
 
 297 
 
 26 “And it shall come to pass, (Josh + 
 
 t Heb. 
 house of 
 the pit. 
 
 will give you, according as he hath pro- 
 
 captive that was in the ‘dungeon; 
 mised, that ye shall keep this service. 
 
 and all the firstborn of cattle. 
 
 which, in obedience to the command, he gave 
 at the time to the people. This method of 
 composition occurs frequently in the Penta- 
 teuch: it involves of course some repetition, 
 from which no very ancient writer would 
 shrink, but it would scarcely have been 
 adopted by a compiler. Moses is ever careful 
 to record first the commands which he re- 
 ceives, and afterwards the way in which he 
 executed them, 
 
 Draw out| ‘The expression is clear, but 
 the sense has been questioned. Moses directs 
 the elders to draw the lamb from the fold 
 and then to take it to their houses. 
 
 the passover| The word is here applied 
 to the lamb; an important fact, marking the 
 lamb as the sign and pledge of the exemption 
 of the Israelites. 
 
 22. a bunch of hyssop| The word ren- 
 dered hyssop occurs only in the Pentateuch, 
 with two exceptions, Ps. li. 7, which refers 
 to the Mosaic rite, and 1 K. iv. 33, where it 
 is applied to a herb growing on the wall, 
 probably a small species of fern, mentioned 
 as the smallest of plants and therefore not 
 likely to be used for the sprinkling. The 
 species here designated does not appear to be 
 the plant now bearing the name. If we fol- 
 low the Hebrew tradition, which in such 
 matters is of weight, and is supported by most 
 critics, it would seem to be a species of 
 origanum, common in Palestine and near 
 Mount Sinai, an aromatic plant with a long 
 straight stalk and leaves well adapted for the 
 purpose. See note on Lev. xiv. 4. 
 
 bason| The rendering rests on good au- 
 thority and gives a good sense: but the word 
 
 means threshold in some other passages and 
 in Egyptian, and is taken here in that sense 
 by the LXX. and Vulgate. If that render- 
 ing were correct it would imply that the 
 lamb was slain on the threshold. 
 
 none...shall go out, &c.] There is no safety 
 outside of the precincts protected by the 
 blood of the lamb; a symbolism too obvious 
 to require pointing out. 
 
 23. the destroyer] The word certainly 
 denotes a personal agent; see note on wv. 29. 
 
 24. this thing] The injunction would seem 
 to apply specially to the sprinkling of blood 
 on the lintel and doorposts; but the authority 
 for changing the rite is unquestioned ; see note 
 on v.g; and the Hebrew tradition is uniform. 
 It may therefore be admitted, with Aben-Ezra 
 and Knobel, who represent very different 
 schools, that this charge refers to the general 
 observance of the Passover. 
 
 27. It is the sacrifice of the Lorp’s pass- 
 over| or This is the sacrifice of the 
 Passover to Jehovah, The most formal and 
 exact designation of the festival is thus given: 
 but ‘the Passover” may mean either the act 
 ot God’s mercy in sparing the Israelites, or 
 the lamb which is offered in sacrifice: more 
 probably the latter, as in v, 21, ‘‘and kill the 
 passover,.” ‘This gives a clear sense to the 
 expression ‘‘to Jehovah;” it was a sacrifice 
 offered to Jehovah by His ordinance. 
 
 The Tenth and Last Plague. 
 
 29. smote all the firstborn] ‘This plague 
 is distinctly attributed here and in v. 23 to 
 
98 
 
 30 And Pharaoh rose up in the 
 night, he, and all his servants, and all 
 the Egyptians; and there was a great 
 cry in Egypt; for there was not a 
 house where there was not one dead. 
 
 31 4 And he called for Moses and 
 Aaron by night, and said, Rise up, 
 and get you forth from among my 
 people, both ye and the children of 
 Israel; and go, serve the Lorp, as ye 
 have said. 
 
 32, Also take your flocks and your 
 herds, as ye have said, and-be gone; 
 and bless me also. 
 
 33 And the Egyptians were urgent 
 upon the people, that they might send 
 
 the personal intervention of THE LoRD; but 
 it is to be observed that although the Lord 
 Himself passed through to smite the Egyp- 
 tians, He employed the agency of ‘‘the de- 
 stroyer,” in whom, in accordance with Heb. 
 xi. 28, all the Ancient Versions, and most 
 critics, recognize an angel. Such indeed is 
 the express statement of Holy Writ with 
 reference to other visitations, as 2 Kings xix. 
 35, and more especially 2 Sam. xxiv. 16. The 
 employment of angelic agency, however, does 
 not always exclude the operation of physical 
 causes. In the same chapter of 2 Sam. which 
 describes the destruction of 70,000 Israelites 
 by an angel, whose personality is distinctly at- 
 tested, see vv. 15—17, it is no less distinctly 
 declared to have been effected by a pestilence; 
 see vv. 13 and 25. Nature accomplishes 
 God’s purposes under His control. As in 
 every other case the hand of God was dis- 
 tinctly shewn by the previous announcement, 
 the suddenness, intensity, and limitation of 
 the calamity. No house of the Egyptians 
 escaped; the firstborn only perished in each; 
 the Israelites were unscathed. 
 
 the captive] In ch. x1. 5, the woman at the 
 mill is mentioned. Such variations are common 
 in Holy Writ, and are to be noticed as shew- 
 ing the disregard of slight or apparent dis- 
 crepancies. ‘The notices of captives under the 
 18th dynasty are numerous on the monuments: 
 they were generally employed in brick-making 
 and building, and this passage implies that 
 they were treated to some extent as settlers in 
 the land. ‘The word ‘‘dungeon” translated 
 more literally in the margin ‘‘house of the 
 pit,” corresponds to the Egyptian ‘‘Rar,” or 
 ‘¢Lar,” in meaning; the same word for ‘‘ pit” 
 is found in both languages. See Brugsch, 
 ‘D.H.’ p.402, who considers it to be Semitic. 
 
 31. the Lorp|] The LXX. add ‘your 
 God,” a very probable reading. 
 
 EXO DUST tix & 
 
 [v. 30—36. 
 
 them out of the land in haste; for 
 they said, We de all dead men. } 
 34 And the people took their dough 
 
 before it was leavened, their ' knead- pe | 
 
 ingtroughs being bound up in their — 
 clothes upon their shoulders. 
 
 35 And the children of Israel did 
 according to the word of Moses; 
 and they borrowed of the Egyptians 
 
 “jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, “chap. 
 > 22. 
 & 11, 2. 
 
 and raiment: 
 
 36 And the Lorp gave the people 
 favour in the sight of the Egyptians, 
 so that they lent unto them such 
 things as they required. And they 
 spoiled the Egyptians. 
 
 32. bless me also| No words could 
 shew more strikingly the complete, though 
 temporary submission of Pharaoh, 
 
 34. kneadingtroughs| Not *“*dough” as 
 in the margin. ‘The same word is used in 
 ch. viii. 3, and Deut. xxviii. 5. ‘The troughs 
 were probably small, such as are now used 
 by the Arabians; wooden bowls in which the 
 cakes when baked are preserved for use. ‘The 
 Hebrews used their outer garment, or mantle, 
 in the same way as the Bedouins at present, who 
 make a bag of the voluminous folds of their 
 haiks or burnous. See Ruth iii. 15; 2 Kings 
 IV. 39. 
 
 35. borrowed] Or ‘asked of.” See note 
 ch. ili. 22. 
 
 36. Jlent] Or gave. The word here 
 used in the Hebrew means simply ‘‘granted 
 their request.” Whether the grant is made 
 as a loan, or as a gift, depends in every in- 
 stance upon the context. In this case the 
 question is whether the Israelites asked for 
 the jewels and the Egyptians granted them 
 as a loan with reference to the festival in the 
 wilderness; or whether this was regarded on 
 both sides as a moderate remuneration for long 
 service, and a compensation for cruel wrongs. 
 The word ‘‘spoiling” (iii. 22) ought to be re- 
 garded as conclusive for the latter sense. ‘The 
 Arabic translator, Saadia, uses the word ‘‘ gave.” 
 ‘The Syriac and the Targum Onk. have the exact 
 equivalent of the Hebrew. Rosenmiiller says 
 truly, in Hebrew the word means simply ‘‘to 
 give;”’ often with the idea of willingness or 
 readiness. ‘Thus too Knobel, who altogether 
 rejects the notion of lending; and Kalisch. 
 Even if the word were taken, as it is by some 
 distinguished scholars, in the sense ‘ lent,” 
 it must be remembered that the actual cause 
 which prevented the Egyptians from recover- 
 ing their property was, that the return of the 
 
amb, 
 
 Vv. 37—42.] ERO OSE LR 299 
 
 37 { And ¢the children of Israel 
 journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, 
 about six hundred thousand on foot 
 that were men, beside children. 
 
 38 And ta mixed multitude went 
 
 up also with them; and flocks, and 
 herds, even very much cattle. 
 é And they baked unleavened 
 cakes of the dough which they brought 
 forth out of Egypt, for it was not 
 leavened; because they. were thrust 
 out of Egypt, and could not tarry, 
 neither had they prepared for them- 
 selves any victual. 
 
 40 4 Now the sojourning of the 
 
 children of Israel, who dwelt in 
 
 Egypt, was “four hundred and thirty 4 Gen. 15. 
 
 years. ee 7. 6. 
 41 And it came to pass at the 4/3. 17. 
 
 end of the four hundred and thirty 
 
 years, even the selfsame day it came 
 
 to pass, that all the hosts of the 
 
 Lorp went out from the land of 
 
 Egypt. 
 
 42 It is fa night to be much ob-'Heb. 
 served unto the Lorn for bringing peter 
 them out from the land of Egypt: “”* 
 this 7s that night of the Lorp to be 
 observed of all the children of Israel 
 
 in their generations. 
 
 Israelites was cut off by the treachery of 
 Pharaoh. Thus Ewald, ‘G. I.’ 11. p. 87. 
 Ewald also accepts the application of the 
 transaction found so commonly in the Fathers, 
 who see in it a figure of the appropriation 
 by the Israelites of Egyptian rites and ceremo- 
 nies, and of the truths thereby represented. 
 
 The Departure of the Israelites. 
 
 37. Rameses| See note on ch.i. 11. Ra- 
 meses was evidently the place of general ren- 
 dezvous, well adapted for that purpose as 
 the principal city of Goshen. ‘The Israelites, 
 by whom it had been built, were probably 
 settled in considerable numbers in it and about 
 it. Pharaoh with his army and court were at 
 that time near the frontier, and Rameses, 
 where a large garrison was kept, was pro- 
 bably the place where the last interview with 
 Moses occurred. Under the 19th dynasty the 
 Pharaohs received foreign embassies, trans- 
 acted treaties, and held their court in this 
 city, which was considerably enlarged and 
 embellished by Rameses II. A discussion on 
 the route of the Israelites from Rameses to 
 Sinai will be found in the Appendix to this 
 book. ‘The first part of the journey appears 
 to have followed the course of the ancient 
 canal. ‘The site of Succoth cannot be exactly 
 determined, but it lay about half-way between 
 Rameses and Etham. It could not therefore 
 have been on the road to Palestine which 
 ran north-east of the lake of crocodiles (Birket 
 Timseh), but to the south of that lake by 
 the road which led by the shortest way to 
 the edge of the wilderness. The frontier to 
 the east of the road appears to have been 
 covered in ancient times by the so-called 
 bitter lakes, which extended to the Gulf of 
 Suez. The name Succoth (Ze. ‘‘ tents” or 
 ‘sbooths” in Hebrew), may have been given 
 by the Israelites, but the same, or a similar 
 word, occurs in Egyptian in connection with 
 
 the district. ‘Thus in De Rougé, ‘ Recher- 
 ches,’ p. 50, we find an officer of state in 
 possession of a domain called Sechet, or So- 
 chot, in the time of Chufu. That domain was 
 certainly in lower Egypt, and probably at no 
 great distance from Memphis. 
 
 600,000] This includes all the males who 
 could march. ‘The total number of the Is- 
 raelites should therefore be calculated not from 
 the men above twenty years old, but from the 
 males above twelve or fourteen, and would 
 therefore amount to somewhat more than two 
 millions. ‘This is not an excessive population 
 for Goshen, nor does it exceed a reasonable 
 estimate of the increase of the Israelites, in- 
 cluding their numerous dependents. See 
 Payne Smith’s ‘Bampton Lectures,’ 1869, 
 L. 111. p. 88. The number 600,000 is con- 
 firmed by many distinct statements and details, 
 and is accepted by Ewald and other critics, 
 
 38. a mixed multitude} They consisted 
 probably of remains of the old Semitic popu- 
 lation, whether or not first brought into the 
 district by the Hyksos is uncertain. As 
 natural objects of suspicion and dislike to the 
 Egyptians who had lately become masters of 
 the country, they would be anxious to escape, 
 the more especially after the calamities which 
 preceded the Exodus. 
 
 very much cattle] ‘This is an important fact, 
 both as shewing that the oppression of the 
 Israelites had not extended to confiscation of 
 their property, and as bearing upon the ques- 
 tion of their maintenance in the Wilderness. 
 
 40. who dwelt] Read, which they so- 
 journed. ‘The obvious intention of Moses 
 is to state the duration of the sojourn in 
 Egypt. On the interpretation and chrono- 
 logy see note below. 
 
 41. At the end of this verse the LXX. 
 add ‘‘ by night.” 
 
300 
 
 7 Numb. 
 OQ. 12. 
 
 43 § And the Lorp said unto 
 Moses and Aaron, This zs the ordi- 
 nance of the passover: There shall 
 no stranger eat thereof : 
 
 44 But every man’s servant that 
 is bought for money, when thou hast 
 circumcised him, then shall he eat 
 thereof. 
 
 45 A foreigner and an hired ser- 
 vant shall not eat thereof. 
 
 46 ?In one house shall it be eaten ; 
 thou shalt not carry forth ought of 
 the flesh abroad out of the house; 
 
 # John 19. “neither shall ye break a bone thereof. 
 <i 47 All the congregation of Israel 
 t Heb. shall ' keep it. 
 
 48 And when a stranger shall so- 
 
 43. And the Lorpv said| ‘The following 
 passage, from this verse to v, 16 of the next 
 chapter, contains additional instructions re- 
 garding the Passover. Such instructions were 
 needed when the Israelites were joined by the 
 ‘¢mixed multitudes” of strangers; and they 
 were probably given at Succoth, on the morn- 
 ing following the departure from Rameses. 
 The antiquity of this section is admitted by 
 critics of all schools, The first point which 
 required to be determined was the condition 
 of participation in the rite; it is simple and 
 complete. No one wasto be admitted without 
 being circumcised: all were to be admitted 
 who were qualified by that rite, 
 
 no stranger| lit. ‘son of a stranger.” ‘The 
 term is general; it includes all who were 
 aliens from Israel, until they were incorpo- 
 rated into the nation by circumcision, ‘The 
 Arabic translator is probably right in using 
 a word which involves the idea of persistence 
 in a false religion; the Targum goes farther, 
 and takes a word which means apostate, 
 
 44, servant| or ‘‘slave.” It seems better 
 to retain the word ‘‘servant,” for although 
 the servant was, strictly speaking, a slave, 
 being the property of his master, his condi- 
 tion differed very widely from that of a slave 
 in heathen countries, or those Christian na- 
 tions wherein slavery is legalized. ‘The circum- 
 cision of the slave, thus enjoined formally on 
 the first day that Israel became a nation, in 
 accordance with the law given to Abraham 
 Gen, xvii. 12, made him a true member of the 
 family, equally entitled to all religious privi- 
 
 EOD Divs; ok 
 
 [v. 43—51. 
 
 journ with thee, and will keep the 
 passover to the Lorp, let all his 
 males be circumcised, and then let 
 him come near and keep it; and he 
 shall be as one that is born in the 
 land: for no uncircumcised person 
 shall eat thereof. 
 
 49 One law shall be to him that 
 is homeborn, and unto the stranger 
 that sojourneth among you. 
 
 50 Thus did all the children of 
 Israel; as the Lonp commanded Mo- 
 ses and Aaron, so did they. 
 
 51 And it came to pass the self- 
 same day, that the Lorp did bring 
 the children of Israel out of the land 
 of Egypt by their armies. 
 
 leges, In the household of a priest the slave 
 was even permitted to eat the consecrated 
 food: Lev, xxii, 11. 
 
 45. d foreigner| or sojourner. ‘The 
 Hebrew means one who resides in a country, 
 not having a permanent home, nor being at- 
 tached to an Israelitish household, A differ- 
 ent word is used v, 43. 
 
 46. In one house| ‘The Targum renders 
 this ‘‘in one company,” a translation which, 
 though not literal, expresses the true meaning 
 of the injunction. Each lamb was to be 
 entirely consumed by the members of one 
 company, whether they belonged to the same 
 household or not. 
 
 break a bone] The typical significance of 
 this injunction is recognized by St John; see 
 marginal reference. It is not easy to assign 
 any other satisfactory reason for it. ‘This 
 victim alone was exempt from the general 
 law by which the limbs were ordered to be 
 separated from the body. 
 
 48. when a stranger shall sojourn] or 
 ‘¢when a stranger shall settle with thee.” 
 It is not easy to express in English the exact 
 meaning of these words, ‘The sojourner and 
 the hired servant did not come under the defi- 
 nition of a permanent settler, When circum- 
 cised any foreigner became one of the chosen 
 race, 
 
 50. Thus did, &c.] This verse and the fol- 
 lowing apply apparently to the stay of the 
 people at Succoth, where they may have 
 remained a short time, completing their pre- 
 paration for final departure from Egypt. 
 
Peco DUST, 
 
 NOTES on vv. 4, 8, 40. 
 
 4, ‘The variations in translating this verse 
 do not affect the general sense, but indicate 
 some difficulty in the construction, ‘+ Each 
 man according to his eating” is understood 
 by the Vulg. to mean the number which may 
 be sufficient to consume the lamb: but the 
 evident sense is that the head of the family 
 must judge what quantity each person will 
 probably consume, a quantity varying of 
 course according to age, strength, and other 
 circumstances, ‘The Hebrew root DD3, with 
 its derivatives, does not occur in any book 
 but the Pentateuch, and with one exception, 
 Num, xxxi., only in connection with this 
 special transaction, nor is it found in any of 
 the Semitic languages, It is evidently archaic, 
 unknown to later Hebrews except from this 
 book, Gesenius points out the analogy with 
 other roots with the same or similar initials, 
 and Fuerst compares the Sanscrit cas, kshi, 
 which however differ, having, as well as the 
 Egyptian sesha, the sense of cutting, wound- 
 ing, &c. 
 
 8. Hebrew NMi¥N; derived by Gesenius 
 from 7319, ‘‘cum voluptate hausit, gustavit.” 
 Brugsch, ‘D.H.’ s.v., suggests an Egyptian 
 etymology. ‘The cakes offered at the festival 
 of the New Year to Osiris were called mest, 
 or mesi-t. It is possible that the word was 
 commonly used while the Israelites were in 
 Egypt to denote sweet, or unleavened, cakes 
 used exclusively for sacred purposes. Knobel 
 and Keil agree in referring mazzoth to a word 
 extant in Arabic, in the sense ‘‘pure:” but that 
 sense is secondary and probably not ancient; 
 the root has the meaning assigned above to 
 73. At the end of this verse the LXX. 
 and Vulg. omit ‘‘it” after ‘‘eat.” ‘This gives 
 a preferable construction to that of our A.V.; 
 and the authority of the LXX., always high 
 in the Pentateuch, is especially so in this book. 
 
 40. The rendering of the Authorised Ver- 
 sion, ‘‘who dwelt,” is peculiar. It has no 
 support in the Ancient Versions: (the LXX. 
 have jv xar@xnoay; the Vulg. qua manse- 
 runt; thus also the Arabic, Syriac, Chaldee 
 and Samaritan;) nor does it appear to be 
 adopted by any modern commentator. In 
 fact the mention of the sojourning without 
 reference to its duration would be beside the 
 mind of the writer. If the Hebrew text be 
 taken as it stands, it fixes that duration to 430 
 years; and this is accepted by the majority of 
 critics of all schools. It agrees substantially 
 with Genesis xv. 13, 14, when the announce- 
 ment was first made to Abraham, ‘‘know of a 
 surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a 
 land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; 
 and they shall afflict them four hundred years; 
 and also that nation, whom they shall serve, 
 will I judge: and afterwards shall they come 
 out with great substance.” ‘The expressions 
 here used apply to Egypt and not to Canaan, 
 
 in which the Patriarchs were certainly not 
 made to serve. ‘The additional statement in 
 v. 16 of the same chapter ‘‘in the fourth gene- 
 ration they shall come hither again” pre- 
 sents some difficulty; it is however probably 
 identical in sense with the preceding one, 
 referring to the time during which the people 
 would serve in a strange land; the term gene- 
 ration is understood by Gesenius and other 
 Hebrew scholars to be equivalent to a cen- 
 tury. 
 
 The correctness of the Hebrew text has 
 however been questioned. The LXX. ac- 
 cording to the Vatican codex inserts after 
 Egypt, ‘“‘and in the land of Canaan:” or ac- 
 cording to the Alexandrian codex and Coptic 
 Version, ed. De Lagarde, ‘‘ which they and 
 their fathers dwelt in the land of Egypt and 
 the land of Canaan.” ‘The Samaritan Penta- 
 teuch has ‘‘which they dwelt in the land of 
 Canaan and the land of Egypt.” ‘This is 
 supposed by some to represent a various 
 reading in the original: but the authority of 
 both witnesses is impaired by the variations 
 which indicate an intention to meet a diffi- 
 culty, and by the fact that the most ancient 
 Greek codices omit the words altogether and 
 agree with the Hebrew text. For this we 
 have the evidence of Theophilus Ant. who 
 states twice, ‘ad Aut.’ I1I. § 9 and 24, that 
 the Israelites sojourned 430 years in Egypt: 
 the Samaritan text and that of one late Hebrew 
 MS. which agrees with it are suspected of 
 interpolation, Scholars at present generally 
 accept the Hebrew as genuine, differing only 
 in the interpretation. 
 
 There can be no doubt that at an early 
 time the Jews felt the difficulty of reconciling 
 this statement with the genealogies, which 
 they held to be complete. If Levi were the 
 grandfather of Moses on the mother’s side 
 through Jochebed, and separated only by two 
 descents on the father’s, through Kohath and 
 Amram, it is clear that a space of 430 years 
 could not be accounted for. Levi was past 
 middle age when he went into Egypt; Moses 
 was born 80 years before the Exodus. ‘The 
 difficulty however appears to be insuperable 
 even on the hypothesis that 430 years in- 
 cluded the whole interval between Abraham 
 and the Exodus. Isaac was born 25 years 
 after Abraham’s arrival in Canaan, Jacob was 
 born in Isaac’s 6oth year, and was 130 years 
 old when he entered Egypt. ‘This accounts 
 for 215 years, leaving 215 for the sojourn. 
 But in order to make out 215 years it is 
 necessary to assume that Levi was 95 years 
 old when Jochebed was born, and that Joche- 
 bed was 85 years old when she became 
 mother of Moses. This is said by a com- 
 mentator of great weight not to be im- 
 probable; but it involves two miracles, for 
 which there is no authority in Scripture, 
 
 301 
 
302 
 
 In the later Targum on Exodus ii, 1 a rab- 
 binical tradition is recorded that Jochebed 
 was miraculously restored to youth at the 
 age of 130 years. But even these assumptions 
 would not remove the objection, that the 
 male descendants of Kohath (the grandfather 
 of Moses on this hypothesis) amounted to 
 8600 at the time of the Exodus; see Num. iii. 
 28. ‘The Kohathites were then divided into 
 four families, each of which must have num- 
 bered, including females, about 4300, when 
 Moses was 80 years of age. Whether the 
 longer or shorter period be adopted it is 
 equally necessary either to assume a succes- 
 sion of miracles, or to admit that an indefi- 
 nite number of links in the genealogies are 
 omitted; a fact for which we have positive 
 evidence in the most important of all genealo- 
 gies, that of our Lord, and in that of Ezra, 
 which therefore there can be no irreverence 
 in assuming in a case when it clears up 
 every difficulty in the narrative. 
 
 The Jewish tradition is assumed to be in 
 favour of 215 years; this may be true in re- 
 ference to the later Rabbis: but it is far from 
 being uniform. Josephus adopts it in one 
 passage, ‘Ant.’ II. r5. 2, but in others he 
 distinctly asserts that the period of affliction 
 in Egypt after the death of Joseph lasted 400 
 years; see Ant 1 9, 1 and 3B) 14.v. ont 
 The evidence is worth little, being self-con- 
 tradictory, but it shews that both opinions 
 were held at his time. In the New ‘Testa- 
 ment St Stephen’s speech, Acts vii. 6, recog- 
 
 EXODUS, XIII 
 
 [v. r—3. 
 
 nizes 400 years as the period when the seed of 
 Abraham should be in bondage and evil en- 
 treated, terms which could only apply to 
 Egypt. St Paul however seems to support 
 the other view, Gal. iii. 17, when he says that 
 the law was given 430 years after Abraham: 
 but the period accepted generally by the Jews 
 in his time sufficed for his purpose, and a 
 discussion upon a point which did not affect 
 his argument would have been out of place. 
 
 It may be possible to reconcile the num- 
 ber of the Israelites at the time of the Exo- 
 dus with the shorter period; but it certainly 
 is far more probable if we accept without any 
 reserve the statement of Moses in this pas- 
 sage, made as it is in the most formal and 
 precise terms, with the express purpose of 
 fixing the length of the sojourn permanently 
 upon the national mind, 
 
 The determination of the date of the Ex- 
 odus rests mainly upon the statement in 
 1 K. vi, 1, that 480 years elapsed between the 
 fourth year of Solomon and the time when 
 the children of Israel came out of the land of 
 Egypt. ‘That date is supported by all the 
 ancient versions (the slight deviation in the 
 LXX., 440 for 480, being accounted for by 
 Winer and Thenius in loc. as a lapsus calami, 
 =40 for =80), it is accepted by able 
 critics, and it appears to the writer of this 
 note to accord best with the indications 
 of time in the historical books; but the sub- 
 ject belongs properly to the commentatary on 
 Kings. 
 
 2 “Sanctify unto me all the first- % chap. 2% 
 born, whatsoever openeth the womb & 34. 17 
 among the children of Israel, both of Numb.3.- 
 man and of beast: it zs mine. 3, ae 
 
 3, 4 And Moses said unto the peo- Luke2. 23 
 
 ple, Remember this day, in which 
 
 CHAPTER UAL, 
 
 1 The firstborn are sanctified to God. 3 The 
 memorial of the passover ts commanded. 11 
 The firstlings of beasts are set apart. 17 The 
 Israelites go out of Egypt, and carry Foseph’s 
 
 bones with them, 20 They come to Etham, 
 21 God guideth them by a pillar of a cloud, 
 
 and a pillar of fire ye came out from Egypt, out of the 
 
 ND the Lorp spake unto Moses, house of ‘bondage; for by strength i Heb. 
 A saying, of hand the Lorp brought you out 774" 
 CuHAP. XIII. ‘The instructions in the first will of God that all firstborn were to be 
 
 part of this chapter are not necessarily con- 
 nected with the rest of the narrative, and 
 there may have been special reasons for add- 
 ing some of them, together with the grounds 
 for their observance, when the people were 
 preparing for the invasion of Palestine, ‘This 
 might have been before the beginning of their 
 long wandering in the wilderness of Tih, at 
 the same time when Moses sent the spies to 
 explore Canaan. Whether written later or 
 not, this section contains much which must 
 have been orally given at the first celebration 
 of the Passover. 
 
 2. Sanctify unto me| ‘The command is 
 addressed to Moses, It was to declare the 
 
 consecrated to him, set apart from all other 
 creatures. ‘The command is expressly based 
 upon the Passover, The firstborn exempt 
 from the destruction became in a new and 
 special sense the exclusive property of the 
 Lord: the firstborn of man as His ministers, 
 the firstborn of cattle as victims, In lieu of 
 the firstborn of men the Levites were devoted 
 to the temple services, ‘The consecration of 
 all firstborn is admitted to be peculiar to the 
 Hebrews; nor can any satisfactory reason for 
 such a law be assigned by those who refuse 
 to accept the Scriptural statement, which they 
 admit to be explicit. Knobel refutes the the- 
 ories of other writers, 
 
v. 4—13.] 
 
 from this place: there shall no leaven- 
 ed bread be eaten. 
 
 4. This day came ye out in the 
 month Abib. 
 
 5 4 And it shall be when the Lorp 
 shall bring thee into the land of the 
 Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the 
 Amorites, and the Hivites, and the 
 Jebusites, which he sware unto thy 
 fathers to give thee, a land flowing 
 with milk and honey, that thou shalt 
 keep this service in this month. 
 
 6 Seven days thou shalt eat un- 
 leavened bread, and in the seventh 
 day shall be a feast to the Lorp. 
 
 7 Unleavened bread shall be eaten 
 
 EOD Seo BU 
 
 unto me when I came forth out of 
 Egypt. 
 
 g And it shall be for a sign unto 
 thee upon thine hand, and for a 
 memorial between thine eyes, that 
 the Lorp’s law may be in thy mouth: 
 for with a strong hand hath the Lorp 
 brought thee out of Egypt. 
 
 10 Thou shalt therefore keep this 
 ordinance in his season from year to 
 year. 
 
 1r @ And it shall be when the 
 Lorp shall bring thee into the land 
 of the Canaanites, as he sware unto 
 thee and to thy fathers, and shall 
 give it thee, 
 
 30 
 
 12 ®That thou shalt ‘set apart ? chap. 22. 
 unto the Lorp all that openeth the %,,, ,,. 
 matrix, and every firstling that com- ee 440 
 eth of a beast which thou hast; the t Heb. 
 males shall be the Lorp’s. pesnpes 
 
 seven days; and there shall no lea- 
 vened bread be seen with thee, nei- 
 ther shall there be leaven seen with 
 thee in all thy quarters. 
 
 8 @ And thou shalt shew thy son 
 
 pass over. 
 
 in that day, saying, This is done be- 
 cause of that which the Lorp did 
 
 4. Abid] It is uncertain whether this 
 name was ancient or given then for the first 
 time. It is found only in the Pentateuch, 
 twice in the sense of young wheat, six times 
 as the name of the first month. The two 
 former instances leave little doubt as to the 
 etymology, viz. the month when the wheat 
 began to ripen. Thus the LXX., Targ. and 
 Saadia: In Arabic abbon means green herbs, 
 The name resembles the Egyptian Epiphi, 
 April, and may possibly have been derived 
 from it; that name is ancient, See Brugsch, 
 ICE. pi ¥64, 
 
 5. the Canaanites| Five nations only 
 are named in this passage, whereas six are 
 named in iii. 8, and ten in the original pro- 
 mise to Abraham, Gen. xv.19—21. TheLXX. 
 add the Perizzites and Girgashites, probably 
 on MSS. authority. ‘The first word Canaan- 
 ite is generic, and includes all the Hamite 
 races of Palestine. 
 
 9. And it shall be for a sign unto thee, &c.| 
 Hebrew writers have generally regarded this 
 as a formal injunction to write the precepts 
 on slips of parchment, and to fasten them 
 on the wrists and forehead; but other com- 
 mentators are generally agreed that it is 
 to be understood metaphorically. ‘The words 
 appear to be put into the mouths of the 
 parents. ‘They were to keep all the facts of 
 the passover constantly in mind, and, referring 
 to a custom prevalent ages before Moses in 
 Egypt, to have them present as though they 
 were inscribed on papyrus or parchment 
 
 13 And every firstling of an ass 
 
 thou shalt redeem with a 'lamb; and 1 or, dz. 
 
 fastened on the wrists, or on the face between 
 the eyes. It is improbable that Moses should 
 have adopted that custom, which was scarcely 
 separable from the Egyptian superstition of 
 amulets; but modern Israelites generally al- 
 lege this precept as a justification for the use 
 of phylacteries. Moses states distinctly the 
 object of the precept, which was that the law 
 of Jehovah should be in their mouth: see 
 v, 16. ‘The expression may have been pro- 
 verbial in the time of Moses, as it certainly was 
 at a later period; see Proverbs vi. 20—22, vil. 
 3, where the metaphorical sense is not ques- 
 tioned. Jerome gives a clear and rational 
 interpretation in his commentary on Matthew 
 xxiii. 5, ‘¢Pracepta mea sint in manu tua, 
 ut opere compleantur, sint ante oculos tuos 
 ut nocte et die mediteris in illis.” 
 
 12. thou shalt set apart] lit. as in the 
 margin ‘‘cause to pass over,” but the sense 
 is correctly expressed in the text, which follows 
 the Old Versions, and is preferable to the 
 marginal rendering, which suggests a refer- 
 ence to the word ‘‘ Passover.” 
 
 13. an ass] The reason of the injunction 
 is evidently that the ass could not be offered 
 in sacrifice, being an unclean animal: possibly 
 the only unclean animal domesticated among 
 the Israelites at the time of the Exodus. 
 The principle of the law being obvious, it 
 was extended to the horse and camel, and 
 generally to every unclean beast; see Num, 
 xviii, 1s. The mention of the ass only would 
 scarcely have occurred to an Israelite of a 
 
304 
 if thou wilt not redeem it, then thou 
 shalt break his neck: and all the first- 
 born of man among thy children shalt 
 thou redeem. 
 14 “ And it shall be when thy son 
 piebies asketh thee ‘in time to come, saying, 
 
 What is this? that thou shalt say 
 unto him, By strength of hand the 
 Lorp brought us out from Egypt, from 
 the house of bondage: 
 
 15 And it came to pass, when Pha- 
 raoh would hardly let us go, that 
 the Lorp slew all the firstborn in 
 the land of Egypt, both the firstborn 
 of man, and the firstborn of beast: 
 therefore I sacrifice to the Lorp all 
 that openeth the matrix, being males; 
 but all the firstborn of my children I 
 redeem. 
 
 16 And it shall be for a token 
 
 later age. It has been observed that the ass 
 was held by the Egyptians to be typhonic, 
 z.e. in a peculiar sense unclean: but that feeling 
 appears to belong to a comparatively later 
 period; in early monuments the ass is fre- 
 quently represented, and in the ‘Ritual,’ c.40, 
 it is even a type of Osiris. 
 
 thou shalt redeem] ‘The lamb, or sheep, 
 was given to the priest for the service of the 
 sanctuary, 
 
 Jirstborn of man] ‘The price of redemption 
 was fixed at five shekels of the sanctuary: 
 Num, ili. 47, where see note. 
 
 16. it shall be] ‘This passage confirms the 
 interpretation given above on 7, 9. 
 
 17—19. ‘These verses do not appear to 
 be a continuation of the narrative, which is 
 resumed at v. 20. It is not improbable that 
 some short time was passed at Succoth, and 
 that Moses then gave final injunctions touch- 
 ing the celebration of the Passover, and re- 
 ceived general instructions as to the ultimate 
 direction of the journey. Succoth may very 
 probably have been the head-quarters of the 
 Hebrews in Goshen. ‘The name in Hebrew 
 indicates an assemblage of booths, or moveable 
 huts (see ch. xii. 37), such as were probably 
 used by the Israelites, ever mindful of their 
 condition as sojourners in a strange land: the 
 notice in v, rg naturally leaves the impression 
 that the bones of Joseph were kept there, of 
 course in the charge of his own descendants, 
 
 17. the way of the land of the Philistines] 
 The occupancy of southern Palestine by the 
 Philistines, at a much earlier period than is 
 assigned by any critics to the Exodus, is 
 attested by the narrative in Genesis xxvi, 1. 
 
 EXOD US ie 
 
 [v. 14—19, 
 
 upon thine hand, and for frontlets 
 between thine eyes: for by strength 
 of hand the Lorp brought us forth 
 out of Egypt. 
 
 17 4 And it came to pass, when 
 
 Pharaoh had let the people go, that 
 God led them not through the way of 
 the land of the Philistines, although 
 that was near; for God said, Lest 
 peradventure the people repent when 
 they see war, and they return to 
 Egypt: 
 18 But God led the people about, 
 through the way of the wilderness of 
 the Red sea: and the children of Is- 
 rael went up 'harnessed out of the !0r, 
 land of Egypt. 
 
 1g And Moses took the bones of 
 Joseph with him: for he had straitly 
 sworn the children of Israel, saying, 
 
 It has lately been questioned on the ground 
 that the inhabitants of Ascalon, when it 
 was captured by Rameses II. did not wear 
 the well-known costume of the Philistines, 
 but that of the ancient Canaanites, and that 
 the name Pulisha, z.c. Philistines, occurs first 
 in monuments of the time of Rameses III. 
 Brugsch, ‘ Geog. Ins,’ 11. p, 86. The objection 
 is answered in the Appendix at the end of 
 the volume: here it may suffice to notice that 
 the persons represented on the monuments of 
 Rameses IT. were probably Israelites; for they 
 actually took possession of the cities of the 
 Philistines, who did not recover the territory 
 until a considerable time had elapsed after the 
 death of Joshua. ‘The warlike character of 
 the Philistines is equally conspicuous in the 
 Egyptian and Hebrew records, 
 
 18. harnessed| This interpretation of the 
 Hebrew word rests on the authority of some 
 ancient versions, and a possible etymology is 
 suggested by Rabbinical writers, It seems, 
 however, more probable that the meaning is 
 marshalled or in orderly array. See note below. 
 The objection (grounded on the rendering in 
 our version) that the Israelites were not likely 
 to have been armed is unreasonable. ‘There is 
 not the least indication that they were disarmed 
 by the Egyptians, and as occupying a frontier 
 district frequently assailed by the nomads of the 
 desert they would of necessity be accustomed 
 to the use of arms. ‘The fear expressed by 
 Pharaoh (see ch. i. 10) that they might at any 
 time join the invaders and fight against Egypt 
 was the avowed and doubtless the true motive 
 for the crafty measures by which he hoped to 
 subdue their spirit and prevent their increase. 
 
 by five in 
 a rank, 
 
ExODUSs xX Pi, 
 
 them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to 
 
 v. 20—22. | 
 
 Jen. 50. ¢God will surely visit you; and ye 
 
 sh. 24. shall carry up my bones away hence lead them the way; and by night in 
 
 Numb, With you. a pillar of fire, to give them light; to 
 
 Seek 20 4 And “they took their journey go by day and night: 
 
 .4 from Succoth, and encamped in E- 22 He took not away the pillar of 
 
 , tham, in the edge of the wilderness. the cloud by day, “nor the pillar of 7 Neh. 9. 
 i784 97 And “the Lorp went before ; 
 
 20. Etham} The Egyptian notices of 
 Etham will be found in the Appendix at the end 
 of this volume. ‘The most probable result of 
 those notices is that Etham, which means the 
 house or sanctuary of Tum (the Sun God 
 worshipped specially by that name in lower 
 Egypt), was in the immediate vicinity of Hero- 
 opolis, called by the Egyptians the fortress of 
 Zar, or Zalu (i.e. of foreigners); the frontier 
 city where the Pharaohs of the 18th dynasty 
 reviewed their forces when about to enter upon 
 a campaign on Syria. The name Pithom has 
 precisely the same meaning with Etham, and 
 may possibly be identified with it. It was 
 at this point that the Bedouins of the adjoin- 
 ing wilderness came into contact with the 
 Egyptians. Under the roth dynasty we find 
 them applying in a time of famine for admis- 
 sion to the fertile district commanded by the 
 fortress called the sanctuary of ‘Tum. 
 
 21. pillar of cloud] ‘The Lord Himself 
 did for the Israelites by preternatural means 
 that which armies were obliged to do for 
 themselves by natural agents. Passages are 
 quoted from classical writers which shew 
 that the Persians and Greeks used fire and 
 
 NOTE 
 
 The Hebrew O'¥/9NM is rendered ‘‘armati” 
 by the Vulg., 10112 by Onkelos, 7.e, accincti, 
 expediti, rather than armati, as it is rendered 
 in Walton’s Polyglott. ‘This would suit the 
 etymology proposed by Abulwalid, Kimchi, 
 and Tanchum, and adopted by Kalisch, viz. 
 wign, ilia, abdomen. The sense however would 
 be not ‘‘full-armed,” but simply ‘‘with their 
 loins girded,” as men prepared for a, journey. 
 Thus in Joshua i. 14 it is rendered ev(wvor by 
 the LXX, The Arabicin Walton (by Saadia) 
 
 has , AAAeX0. 2.¢. instructi, marshalled; and this 
 meaning is adopted by many critics, though 
 different etymologies are proposed. Knobel 
 _ says that it must signify assembled, arranged 
 in orderly divisions, in contradistinction from 
 a disorganised rabble. He derives it from 
 Arabic roots, such as > &c. It seems 
 however preferable to take the obvious Hebrew 
 etymology from WINN, i.e. five, probably con- 
 nected with >, agmen instructum, pr. 
 quinquepartitum, which is pointed at by the 
 singular rendering of the LX X. ‘in the fifth 
 VOL. J. 
 
 fire by night, from before the people. 
 
 smoke as signals in their marches, Curtius 
 describes the practice of Alexander, who gave 
 the signal for departure by a fire on a tall 
 pole over his tent, and says, observabatur 
 ignis noctu fumus interdiu. Vegetius and 
 Frontinus mention it as a general custom, 
 especially among the Arabians. ‘The success 
 of some important expeditions, as of Thrasybu- 
 lus and ‘Timoleon, was attributed by popular 
 superstition to a divine light guiding the lead- 
 ers. ‘To these well-known instances may be 
 added two of peculiar interest, as bearing 
 witness to a custom known to all the contem- 
 poraries of Moses. In an inscription of the 
 Ancient Empire an Egyptian general is com- 
 pared to ‘‘a flame streaming in advance of 
 an army.” (See Chabas ‘V. E.’ p, 54; the 
 inscription is in the Denkmeler, 11, pl. 150, 
 2). Thus too in a wellknown papyrus, 
 (Anast. 1) the commander of an expedition 
 is called ‘‘ A flame in the darkness at the head 
 of his soldiers.” By this sign then of the 
 pillar of cloud, the Lord shewed Himself as 
 their leader and general. ‘‘The Lord is a 
 man of war...thy right hand, O Lord, 
 hath dashed in pieces the enemy” (xv.). 
 
 on w. 18. 
 
 generation.” Ewald, ‘G. I.’ explains it ‘‘ar- 
 ranged in five divisions,” z.e. van, centre, two 
 wings and rear-guard. ‘The promptitude with 
 which so vast a multitude was marshalled and 
 led forth justifies admiration, but is not mar- 
 vellous, nor without parallels in ancient and 
 modern history (see Introduction), ‘The Israel- 
 ites had been prepared for departure, some pre- 
 liminary measures must have been taken after 
 each of the plagues when Pharaoh had given a 
 temporary assent to the request of Moses, see 
 vill. 8, 28, ix. 28, x. 16, four several occasions 
 on which notice must have been given to the 
 people. It must also be borne in mind that 
 the despotism of Pharaoh had supplied the 
 Israelites with native officers whom they were 
 accustomed to obey, and with whom they 
 were united by the bond of a common suffer- 
 ing (see ch. v. 14—21), Their leader had 
 the experience of an early life at a warlike 
 court, and of long years passed among the 
 fierce tribes of the desert. ‘The nation more- 
 over has shewn in every age a remarkable talent 
 for prompt and systematic organization, 
 
 U 
 
206 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 1 God instructeth the Israelites in their journey. 
 5 Pharaoh pursueth after them. 10 The 
 Lsraelites murmur. 13 Moses comforteth them. 
 15 God instructeth Moses. 19 The cloud re- 
 moveth: behind the camp. 21 The Israelites 
 pass through the Red sea, 23 which drowneth 
 the Egyptians, 
 
 ND the Lorp spake unto Moses, 
 
 saying, 
 
 The Passage over the Red Sea. 
 
 Cuap. XIV, 2. That they turn] ‘The nar- 
 rative is continued from wv. 20 of the preced- 
 ing chapter. The people were then at Etham, 
 or Pithom, the frontier city towards the wil- 
 derness: they are now commanded to change 
 the direction of their march, and to go south- 
 wards, to the west of the Bitter Lakes, which 
 completely separated them from the desert: 
 see note on ¢. xil. 37. 
 
 Pi-habiroth| ‘The derivation of this name 
 is doubtful. If it is Semitic, like the two 
 other names mentioned in connection with it, 
 the meaning may be ‘‘ mouth, or entrance 
 of the holes or caverns,” but it is more pro- 
 bably Egyptian, with the common prefix Pi, 
 z,e. house. In an ancient papyrus, we read of 
 a place called Hir, or Pe-Hir, where there was 
 a large well, at no great distance from Ra- 
 meses, which it supplied with garlands. See 
 Chabas, ‘ Mél. Eg.’ 11. p. 123. The place is 
 generally identified with Ajrud, a fortress with 
 a very large well of good water (see Niebuhr, 
 ‘ Voyage,’ I. p. 175), situate at the foot of an 
 elevation commanding the plain which extends 
 to Suez, at a distance of four leagues. ‘The 
 journey from Etham might occupy two, or 
 even three days; had however Etham been, as 
 many geographers suppose, half-way between 
 Mukfar and Ajrud (see Robinson’s ‘ Chart’), 
 Pharaoh could not possibly have overtaken 
 the Israelites, whether his head-quarters were 
 at Zoan, or even at Rameses, which was two 
 days’ journey from Etham. 
 
 Migdol| ‘The word means a tower, or 
 fort: it is probably to be identified with Bir 
 Suweis, about two miles from Suez. ‘The 
 water is said by Niebuhr to be scarcely drink- 
 able; according to Robinson, p. 45, it is used 
 only for cooking and washing. ‘This traveller 
 observes justly, that if the wells were in exist- 
 ence at the time of the Exodus they would 
 mark the site of atown. Now M. Chabas 
 has lately shewn that Maktal, or Magdal, 
 an Egyptian fort (which on other grounds he 
 identifies with Migdol), visited by Sethos I. on 
 his return from a campaign in Syria, was built 
 over a large well: see ‘ Voyage d’un Egyptien,’ 
 p. 286. ‘This leaves scarcely any room for 
 doubt as to the locality; it is a point of im- 
 
 EXOD USHZaDy, 
 
 [v. I—3. 
 
 2, Speak unto the children of Israel, 
 that they turn and encamp before 
 
 ¢ Pi-hahiroth, between Migdol and the 2 Numb, 
 
 sea, over against Baal-zephon: before *” 
 it shall ye encamp by the sea. 
 
 For Pharaoh will say of the 
 children of Israel, ‘hey are. entangled 
 in the land, the wilderness hath shut 
 them in. 
 
 portance with reference to the passage over the 
 sea. 
 
 Baal-zephon| ‘This appears to have been the 
 name under which the Phcenicians, who had a 
 settlement in lower Egypt at a very ancient pe- 
 riod, worshipped their chief Deity. ‘The corre- 
 sponding Egyptian Deity was Sutech, who is 
 often called Bal on monuments of the 19th 
 dynasty. Sethos I. gave a name closely con- 
 nected with this to a city in the same neigh- 
 bourhood, which Chabas, 1. c., holds to be 
 Baal-Zephon. ‘There can be no doubt it was 
 near Kolsum, or Suez. In the time of Niebuhr 
 there were considerable ruins close to Suez on 
 the north. From the text it is clear that the 
 encampment of the Israelites extended over the 
 plain from Pi-hahiroth: their head-quarters 
 being between Bir Suweis and the sea opposite 
 to Baal-Zephon. At Ajrud the road branches 
 off in two directions, one leading to the wil- 
 derness by a tract, now dry, but in the time of 
 Moses probably impassable, see next note; the 
 other leading to Suez, which was doubtless 
 followed by the Israelites. 
 
 3. They are entangled, &c.| ‘The mean- 
 ing evidently is, in that direction they have no 
 egress from Egypt: the latter part of the verse 
 is generally rendered as in our Version, ‘‘ the 
 wilderness has shut them in,” but the sense 
 would rather seem to be ‘‘ the wilderness is 
 closed to them;” see note below. ‘The ori- 
 ginal intention of Moses was to go towards 
 Palestine by the wilderness: when that pur- 
 pose was changed by God’s direction and they 
 moved southwards, Pharaoh on receiving in- 
 formation was of course aware that they were 
 completely shut in, since the waters of the 
 Red Sea then extended to the bitter lakes. It 
 is known that the Red Sea at some remote 
 period extended considerably further towards 
 the north than it does at present. In the 
 time of Moses the water north of Kolsum 
 joined the bitter lakes, though at present the 
 constant accumulation of sand has covered 
 the intervening space to the extent of 8000 
 to 10000 yards, not however rising higher 
 than six feet above the level of the lakes, 
 and from 40 to 50 feet below the level of the 
 Red Sea. Mr Malan, p. 217, observes that 
 the lake Timseh, still further north, is full of 
 
v. 4—11.] 
 
 4 And J will harden Pharaoh’s 
 heart, that he shall follow after them ; 
 and I will be honoured upon Pharaoh, 
 and upon all his host; that the Egyp- 
 tians may know that I am the Lorp, 
 And they did so. 
 
 5 4 And it was told the king of 
 Egypt that the people fled: and the 
 heart of Pharaoh and of his servants 
 was turned against the people, and 
 they said, Why have we done this, 
 that we have let Israel go from serv- 
 ing us? 
 
 6 And he made ready his chariot, 
 and took his people with him: 
 
 7 And he took six hundred chosen 
 chariots, and all the chariots of Egypt, 
 and captains over every one of them. 
 
 the Saris or Shari, the arundo Egyptiaca, from 
 which the Red Sea takes its local name. 
 
 5. the people fled) ‘This was a natural in- 
 ference from the change of direction, which 
 could have no object but escape from Egypt 
 by the pass at Suez. Up to the time when 
 that information reached Pharaoh both he and 
 his people understood that the Israelites would 
 return after keeping a festival in the district 
 adjoining Etham. From Etham the intelli- 
 gence would be forwarded by the commander 
 of the garrison to Rameses in less than a day, 
 and the cavalry, a highly disciplined force, 
 would of course be ready for immediate de- 
 parture. 
 
 7. six hundred chosen chariots| ‘The 
 Egyptian army comprised large numbers of 
 chariots, each drawn by two horses, with two 
 men, one bearing the shield and driving, the 
 other fully armed. ‘The horses were thorough- 
 bred, renowned for strength and spirit. Cha- 
 riots are first represented on the monuments of 
 the 18th dynasty: they were used by Amosis 
 I. in the expedition against the shepherd kings, 
 by Thotmes I. against Syria and Mesopo- 
 tamia: under Thotmes III. we have the re- 
 cord of a battle at Megiddo in which 897 
 war-chariots were captured from the confede- 
 rated forces of northern Palestine and Syria. 
 By ‘‘all the chariots of Egypt” we are to un- 
 derstand all that were stationed in lower Egypt, 
 most of them probably at Rameses and other 
 frontier garrisons near the head-quarters of 
 Pharaoh. According to Diodorus Siculus, 
 I. 54, the Egyptians had 27000 chariots in the 
 time of Rameses II. 
 
 captains over every one of them] Rather 
 eaptains over the whole of them. ‘Thus 
 
 ESO) US. 
 
 Reeve 3 
 
 8 And the Lorp hardened the 
 heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and 
 he pursued after the children of Is- 
 rael: and the children of Israel went 
 out with an high hand. 
 
 9g But the ?Egyptians pursued after @ Josh. 24. 
 them, all the horses and chariots of r'Mac. 4. 
 
 Pharaoh, and his horsemen, and his % 
 army, and overtook them encamping 
 by the sea, beside Pi-hahiroth, before 
 Baal-zephon. 
 
 ro 4 And when Pharaoh drew nigh, 
 the children of Israel lifted up their 
 eyes, and, behold, the Egyptians 
 marched after them; and they were 
 sore afraid: and the children of Israel 
 cried out unto the Lorp. 
 
 11 And they said unto Moses, Be- 
 
 the LXX., Vulg., Saadia, Syr. The word 
 rendered captains (Shalishim, lit. third or 
 thirtieth) is supposed by Reediger, Ges. 
 ‘'Thes.’ s. v., to mean the warriors in the cha- 
 riots, but the Egyptians never put more than 
 two men in a chariot. The true meaning 
 is captains or commanders. The word may 
 represent an Egyptian title. ‘The king had 
 about him a council of thirty, each of whom 
 bore a title corresponding to the Roman de- 
 cemvir, viz. Mapu, a ‘‘thirty man,” See 
 Pleyte, ‘Ag. Zeitschrift,’ 1866, p. 12, and 
 Chabas, ‘ Voyage d’un Egyptien.”. The word 
 occurs frequently in the books of Kings. David 
 seems to have organized the Shalishim as a 
 distinct corps, see 2 Sam. xxiii. 8, where it is 
 translated, as in this passage, captains. He 
 probably retained the old name, though it is 
 possible that he may have adopted the Egyp- 
 tian system, being on ffiendly terms with the 
 contemporary dynasty, which gave a queen to 
 Israel. 
 
 9. and his horsemen| Horsemen are not 
 represented on Egyptian monuments, even on 
 those of a later age, when they were employed. 
 in great numbers; the omission is probably 
 connected with the strict regulations of Egyp- 
 tian art; but Diodorus Siculus, whose autho- 
 rity is not questioned on this point, states that 
 Rameses II. had a force of 24000 cavalry, in- 
 dependent of the chariotry ; Isaiah makes the 
 same distinction between the chariots and 
 horsemen of Egypt, c. xxxi. 1. The technical 
 expression for mounting on horseback is found 
 in ancient papyri. 
 
 beside Pi-hahiroth| This statement is urged. 
 as an objection to the identification with Ajrud; 
 but the encampment of the great host of Israel 
 extended over many miles, 
 
 U2 
 
308 
 
 cause there were no graves in Egypt, 
 hast thou taken us away to die in the 
 wilderness? wherefore hast thou dealt 
 thus with us, to carry us forth out of 
 Egypt? 
 
 12 ‘Js not this the word that we 
 did tell thee in Egypt, saying, Let us 
 alone, that we may serve the Egyp- 
 tians? For it had been better for us 
 to serve the Egyptians, than that we 
 should die in the wilderness. 
 
 13 { And Moses said unto the 
 people, Fear ye not, stand still, and 
 
 see the salvation of the Lorp, which 
 Joo where. he will shew to you to day: "for the 
 asyouhave Koyptians whom ye have seen to day, 
 
 seen the 
 
 Egyptians ye Shall see them again no more for 
 today, &c. ever 
 
 14 The Lorp shall fight for you, 
 and ye shall hold your peace. 
 
 15 “ And the Lorp said unto Mo- 
 ses, Wherefore criest thou unto me? 
 speak unto the children of Israel, that 
 they go forward: 
 
 16 But lift thou up thy rod, and 
 stretch out thine hand over the sea, 
 and divide it: and the children of Is- 
 rael shall go on dry ground through 
 the midst of the sea. 
 
 ¢ chap. 6. 
 Q- 
 
 ll. xo graves in Egypt] This bitter taunt 
 was probably suggested by the vast extent of 
 cemeteries in Egypt, which might not impro- 
 perly be called the land of tombs: it would 
 scarcely have been imagined by one who had 
 not dwelt there. 
 
 12. Let us alone} ‘This is a gross exag- 
 geration, yet not without a semblance of truth: 
 for although the Israelites-welcomed the mes- 
 sage of Moses at first, they gave way com- 
 pletely at the first serious trial. See the refer- 
 ence in marg. ‘The whole passage foreshadows 
 the conduct of the people in the wilderness. 
 
 13. for the Egyptians whom, &c.| Rather 
 for as ye have seen the Egyptians to- 
 day ye shall see them again no more for ever. 
 Our A.V. follows the Vulg., but the LXX., 
 Targ., Saad. give the true sense, ye shall 
 never see the Egyptians in the same way, 
 under the same circumstances. 
 
 15. Wherefore criest thou unto me?| Moses 
 does not speak of his intercession, and we 
 only know of it from this answer to his 
 prayer. ‘This is a characteristic of the narra- 
 tive, important to be observed with reference 
 to other omissions less easily supplied. 
 
 | Po) MD Ws 
 
 XIV. 
 
 17 And I, behold, I will harden 
 the hearts of the Egyptians, and they 
 shall follow them: and I will get me 
 honour upon Pharaoh, and upon all 
 his host, upon his chariots, and upon 
 his horsemen. 
 
 18 And the Egyptians shall know 
 that I am the Lorp, when I have 
 gotten me honour upon Pharaoh, 
 upon his chariots, and upon his horse- 
 men. 
 
 1g @ And the angel of God, which 
 went before the camp of Israel, re- 
 moved and went behind them; and 
 the pillar of the cloud went from be- 
 fore their face, and stood behind 
 them : 
 
 20 And it came between the camp. 
 of the Egyptians and the camp of 
 Israel; and it was a cloud and dark- 
 ness to them, but it gave light by night 
 to these: so that the one came not 
 near the other all the night. 
 
 21 And Moses stretched out his 
 hand over the sea; and the Lorp 
 caused the sea to go back by a strong 
 east wind all that night, and made 
 
 [v. 12—21. 
 
 — 
 
 d Josh, 
 the sea dry /and, and the waters were ek 
 @ divided. Psal. 114 
 
 or 
 
 19. the angel of God] Compare ch, xill. 21; 
 and see note on ch. ili. 2. 
 
 20. ‘The words in Italics are accepted as 
 explanatory by some commentators; but the 
 LXX. read ‘‘and the night passed” instead 
 of ‘‘it gave light by night.” ‘The sense is 
 good and the reading not improbable. 
 
 21. a strong east wind | It is thus dis- 
 tinctly stated that the agency by which the 
 object was effected was natural. It is clear 
 that Moses takes for granted that a strong 
 east wind blowing through the night, under 
 given circumstances, would make the passage 
 quite possible. It would seem to be scarcely 
 practicable, when the wind blows from other 
 quarters (see ‘Tischendorf’s account, ‘ Aus dem 
 heiligen Lande,’ p. 21). Of course this would 
 not explain the effect, if the passage had been 
 made, as was formerly supposed, through the 
 deep sea near the Wady Musa, some leagues 
 south of Suez. All the conditions of the nar- 
 rative are satisfied by the hypothesis, that the 
 passage took place near Suez. 
 
 the waters were divided i.e. there was a 
 complete separation between the water of the 
 gulf and the water to the north of Kolsum. 
 
| Or, 
 
 v. 22—28.] 
 
 22 And ¢the children of Israel went 
 into the midst of the sea upon the dry 
 ground: and the waters were a wall 
 unto them on their right hand, and on 
 their left. 
 
 23 4 And the Egyptians pursued, 
 and went in after them to the midst 
 of the sea, even all Pharaoh’s horses, 
 his chariots, and his horsemen. 
 
 24 And it came to pass, that in the 
 morning watch the Lorp looked unto 
 the host of the Egyptians through the 
 pillar of fire and of the cloud, and 
 troubled the host of the Egyptians, 
 
 2.5 And took off their chariot wheels, 
 "that they drave them heavily: so 
 
 me go that the Egyptians said, Let us flee 
 
 heavily. 
 
 from the face of Israel; for the Lorp 
 
 22. were a wall unto them] ‘The waters 
 served the purpose of an intrenchment and 
 wall; the people could not be attacked on 
 either flank during the transit; to the north 
 was the water covering the whole district ; to 
 the south was the Red Sea. For the idiom, 
 compare Nahum iii. 8. 
 
 23. the Egyptians pursued| The Egyp- 
 tians might be aware that under ordinary cir- 
 cumstances there would be abundant time for 
 the passage of the chariots and cavalry, of 
 which the force chiefly consisted. 
 
 24. in the morning watch| At sunrise, 
 a little before 6 A.M. in April. 
 
 troubled] Threw them into confusion by a 
 sudden panic. 
 
 25. And took off their chariot wheels] 
 This translation is generally accepted. ‘The 
 LX X. however render the word ‘‘ bound” or 
 clogged (cuvédnoe =D"), a probable read- 
 ing, and perhaps more suited to the context. 
 
 26. that the waters may come| A sud- 
 den cessation of the wind at sunrise, coinciding 
 with a spring tide (it was full moon) would 
 immediately convert the low flat sand-banks 
 first into a quicksand, and then into a mass 
 of waters, in a time far less than would suffice 
 for the escape of a single chariot, or horseman 
 loaded with heavy corslet. 
 
 27. overthrew the Egyptians| Better as in 
 the margin, The Lord shook them off, 
 hurled them from their chariots into the sea. 
 Thus in the papyrus quoted above, when the 
 chariot is broken the warrior is hurled out 
 with such force that his armour is buried in 
 the sand. 
 
 28. not so much as one of them| ‘The 
 
 Pe OWI US) > ATV. 
 
 fighteth for them against the Egyp- 
 tians. 
 
 26 @ And the Lorp said unto Mo- 
 ses, Stretch out thine hand over the 
 sea, that the waters may come again 
 upon the Egyptians, upon their cha- 
 riots, and upon their horsemen. 
 
 27 And Moses stretched forth his 
 hand over the sea, and the sea returned 
 to his strength when the morning ap- 
 peared; and the Egyptians fled against 
 iC 5 
 Egyptians in the midst of the sea. 
 
 28 And the waters returned, and 
 covered the chariots, and the horse- 
 men, and all the host of Pharaoh that 
 came into the sea after them; there re- 
 mained not so much as “one of them. 
 
 II. 
 
 statement is explicit, all the chariots and horse- 
 men and that portion of the infantry which 
 followed them into the bed of the sea. In fact, 
 as has been shewn, escape would be impossible. 
 A doubt has been raised whether Pharaoh him- 
 self perished: but independent of the distinct 
 statement of the Psalmist, Ps. cxxxvi. 15, his 
 destruction is manifestly assumed, and was in 
 fact inevitable. ‘The station of the king was 
 in the vanguard: on every monument the Pha- 
 raoh is represented as the leader of the army, 
 and allowing for Egyptian flattery on other 
 occasions, that was his natural place in the 
 pursuit of fugitives whom he hated so in- 
 tensely. The death of the Pharaoh, and 
 the entire loss of the chariotry and cavalry 
 accounts for the undisturbed retreat of the 
 Israelites through a district then subject to 
 Egypt and easily accessible to their forces. 
 The blow to Egypt was not fatal, for the loss 
 of men might not amount to many thousands; 
 but falling upon their king, their leaders and 
 the portion of the army indispensable for the 
 prosecution of foreign wars, it crippled them 
 effectually. If, as appears probable, Toth- 
 mosis II. were the Pharaoh, the first recorded 
 expedition into the Peninsula took place 17 
 years after his death; and twenty-two years 
 elapsed before any measures were taken to re- 
 cover the lost ascendancy of Egypt in Syria. 
 So complete, so marvellous was the deliver- 
 ance: thus the Israelites were baptized to 
 Moses in the cloud and in the sea. When 
 they left Baal-Zephon they were separated 
 finally from the idolatry of Egypt: when they 
 passed the Red Sea their independence of its 
 power was sealed; their life as a nation then 
 began, a life inseparable henceforth from belief 
 in Jehovah, and His servant Moses, only to be 
 merged in the higher life revealed by His Son. 
 
 309 
 
 and the Lorp ‘toverthrew the? Heb. 
 shook off. 
 
 J Psal. 106. 
 
29 But the children of Israel walked 
 upon dry /and in the midst of the 
 sea; and the waters were a wall unto 
 them on their right hand, and on 
 their left. 
 
 30 Thus the Lorp saved Israel 
 that day out of the hand of the Egyp- 
 
 ME OAD URSit ew ue 
 
 [v. 29—2. 
 
 tians; and Israel saw the Egyptians 
 dead upon the sea shore. 
 
 t t Heb, 
 31 And Israel saw that great ' work |e 
 
 which the Lorp did upon the Egyp- 
 tians: and the people feared the Lorn, 
 and believed the Lorn, and his ser- 
 vant Moses. 
 
 NOTE on w. 3. 
 
 The Hebrew has 129m ony 7D. ‘The 
 LXX. and Vulg. render 3D ouyxéxhecke, 
 conclusit: but it is not followed by an accu- 
 sative in the Hebrew, and must be intransi- 
 
 tive, as it is taken by Saadia hs, and the 
 Syr. wLL}, i.e. conclusum est. Thus in 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 1 Moses song. 22 The people want water. 
 23 The waters at Marah are bitter. 25 A 
 tree sweeteneth them. 27 At Elim are twelve 
 wells, and seventy palm trees. 
 
 HEN sang * Moses and the chil- 
 
 dren of Israel this song unto 
 
 Cuap. XV. 1—18. With the deliver- 
 ance of Israel is associated the development 
 of the national poetry, which finds its first 
 and perfect expression in this magnificent 
 hymn. It is said to have been sung by Moses 
 and the people, an expression which evidently 
 points to him as the author. ‘That it was 
 written at the time is an assertion expressly 
 made in the text, and it is supported by the 
 strongest internal evidence. ‘The style is ad- 
 mitted, even by critics who question its 
 genuineness, to be archaic, both in the lan- 
 guage, which isequally remarkable for grandeur, 
 and severe simplicity, and in the general struc- 
 ture, which, though rhythmical and systematic, 
 differs materially from later compositions, in 
 which the divisions are more numerous and 
 the arrangement more elaborate. ‘The sub- 
 ject matter and the leading thoughts are such 
 as belong to the time and the occasion; un- 
 like the imitations in the later Psalms, the 
 song abounds in allusions to incidents passing 
 under the eye of the composer: it has every 
 mark of freshness and originality. ‘The only 
 objections are founded on the prophetic por- 
 tion (1s—17): but if ever there was a crisis 
 calculated to elicit the spirit of prophecy, it 
 was that of the Exodus, if ever a man fitted 
 to express that spirit, it was Moses, Even 
 
 Judges iii. 22, ‘‘ The fat closed upon the blade.” 
 ‘The correct rendering seems to be the wilder- 
 ness is closed to them. In no sense could the 
 wilderness be a barrier; the direct route led 
 them into it, the change of route shut them 
 out from it. : 
 
 the Lorn, and spake, saying, I will 
 sing unto the Lorp, for he hath 
 triumphed gloriously: the horse and 
 his rider hath he thrown into the sea. 
 
 2 The Lorp is my strength and 
 song, and he is become my salvation: 
 he zs my God, and I will prepare him 
 
 objectors admit that the invasion of Palestine 
 was contemplated by Moses: if so what more 
 natural than that after the great catastrophe, 
 which they accept as an historical fact, he 
 should anticipate the terror of the nations 
 through whose territories the Israelites would 
 pass, and whose destruction was an inevitable 
 condition of their success.. In every age this 
 song gave the tone to the poetry of Israel; 
 especially at great critical epochs of deliver- 
 ance. In the book of Revelation (xv. 3) it 
 is associated with the final triumph of the 
 Church, when the saints ‘‘ having the harps 
 of God” will sing ‘‘the Song of Moses the 
 servant of God, and the Song of the Lamb.” 
 The division of the Song into three parts is 
 distinctly marked: 1—5, 6—10, 11—18: each 
 begins with an ascription of praise to God; 
 each increases in length and varied imagery 
 unto the triumphant close. 
 FIRST DIvIsIon. 1—10. Ascription of 
 praise and brief statement of the transaction. 
 1. He hath triumphed gloriously| ‘This 
 gives the true meaning, but not the force and 
 grandeur of the Hebrew, literally He is glori- 
 ously glorious. Among the Ancient Versions 
 the LXX, évddEws SeSo€acrat, comes near, the 
 
 Arabic of Saadia is very fine | hae} oat. 
 
v. 3—8.] 
 
 an habitation; my father’s God, and 
 I will exalt him. 
 
 3 The Lorp és a man of war: the 
 Lorp 7s his name. 
 
 4 Pharaoh’s chariots and his host 
 hath he cast into the sea: his chosen 
 captains also are drowned in the Red 
 sea. 
 
 5 The depths have covered them: 
 they sank into the bottom as a stone. 
 
 6 Thy right hand, O Lorp, is be- 
 
 the horse and his rider| The word “rider” 
 may include horseman, but applies properly 
 to the charioteer: the Egyptian word for 
 horse which corresponds exactly to the He- 
 brew, always designates the swift, high- 
 bred horses used for the war-cars of nobles. 
 Thus in the papyrus ‘ Anast.’ 1, ‘* The horses 
 of my chariot are swift as jackals: their eyes 
 like fire: they are like a hurricane when it 
 bursts.” 
 
 2. The Lorp is my strength and song) 
 My strength and song is Jah. ‘This 
 name is specially associated with victory by 
 the Psalmist, Ps. Ixviii. 4,. It was doubtless 
 chosen here by Moses to draw attention to 
 the promise ratified by the name ‘I am.” 
 The form of the word ‘‘song” in Hebrew 
 is archaic. 
 
 I will prepare Him an habitation] 1 will 
 glorify Him. Scholars agree that the He- 
 brew word means to celebrate with grateful, 
 loving adoration. In fact this sense is given 
 by most of the ancient Versions. Our Au- 
 thorised Version is open to serious objection, 
 as suggesting a thought (viz. of erecting a 
 temple) which could hardly have been in the 
 mind of Moses at that time, and unsuited to 
 the occasion. It is one of many instances of 
 undue deference to Rabbinical authorities on 
 the part of our translators. ‘The ‘Targum of 
 Onkelos, who is followed by Kimchi, has ‘‘I 
 will build Him a sanctuary.” ‘Thus too the 
 interlinear Latin in Walton’s Polyglott. ‘The 
 LXX., Vulg. and Syr. render the word cor- 
 rectly. Saadia has ‘‘I will take refuge with 
 Him.” 
 
 3. a man of war| Compare Ps. xxiv. 8. 
 The name has on this occasion a _ peculiar 
 fitness; man had no part in the victory: the 
 battle was the Lord’s. 
 
 the Lorp is his name| A pregnant expres- 
 sion, implying that the manifestation of might, 
 by which the salvation of Israel was effected, 
 accorded with the name Jehovah, the most 
 perfect expression of the Divine Essence. 
 
 4. hath He cast} ‘The Hebrew is very 
 forcible, ‘‘hurled,” as from a sling. See 
 
 Li 2 AON DAO ho eae 
 
 ioe) 
 
 come glorious in power: thy right 
 hand, O Lorp, hath dashed in pieces 
 the enemy. 
 
 7 And in the greatness of thine ex- 
 cellency thou hast overthrown them 
 that rose up against thee: thou sentest 
 forth thy wrath, which consumed them 
 as stubble. 
 
 8 And with the blast of thy nostrils 
 the waters were gathered together, the 
 floods stood upright as an heap, and 
 
 note on ch. xiv. 27. All the words which de- 
 scribe the fall of the mailed warriors of Egypt 
 are such as one who actually witnessed their 
 overthrow would naturally employ. See note 
 on the next verse. 
 
 his chosen captains| ‘The same expression is 
 used in ch. xiv. 7, where see note. It desig- 
 nates officers of the highest rank, chosen spe- 
 cially to attend on the person of Pharaoh: 
 probably commanders of the 2000 Calasirians 
 who alternatively with the Hermotybians 
 formed his body-guard. ‘They may have been 
 for the most part personally known to Moses, 
 
 drowned| ‘The original is more graphic, 
 ‘¢ plunged, submerged,” describing the over- 
 throw in the rushing tide, 
 
 5. as a stone| ‘The warriors on chariots 
 are always represented on the monuments 
 with heavy coats of mail; the corslets of 
 ‘¢ chosen captains” consisted of plates of highly 
 tempered bronze, with sleeves reaching nearly 
 to the elbow, covering the whole body and the 
 thighs nearly to the knee; see the engraving 
 of the corslet of Rameses III. in Sir G. Wil- 
 kinson, ‘M. and-C.’ 4. p. 366. ‘They must 
 have sunk at once like a stone, or as we read 
 in v. ro, like lumps of lead. ‘Touches like 
 these come naturally from an eye-witness. 
 
 Second Division. 6—10. This division 
 presents the details more fully, and completes 
 the picture by describing the mode in which 
 the destruction was effected, and the arrogance 
 of the Egyptians by which it was provoked. 
 
 6. is become glorious| ‘The translation is 
 correct, but inadequately represents the force 
 and beauty of the Hebrew word, which is 
 archaic im ferm and usage. 
 
 7. thy a herd lit. Thy burning, z.e. the 
 fire of Thy wrath, a word chosen expressly 
 with reference to the effect: it consumed ‘the 
 enemy suddenly, completely, like fire burning 
 up stubble. The simile is not uncommon in 
 Egyptian: thus in the poem of Pentaour ad- 
 dressed to Rameses II. ‘‘’The people were as 
 stubble before thy chariot :” but the superiority 
 of the Hebrew is obyious—it represents the 
 
ll Or, 
 vePOSSESS. 
 
 the depths were congealed in the heart 
 of the sea. 
 
 g The enemy said, I will pursue, I 
 will overtake, I will divide the spoil ; 
 my lust shall be satisfied upon them; 
 I will draw my sword, my hand shall 
 "destroy them. 
 
 BeOS. Ex Ve 
 
 [v. 9-—11. 
 
 10 Thou didst blow with thy wind, 
 the sea covered them: they sank as 
 lead in the mighty waters. 
 
 11 Whoizs like unto thee, O Lorn, 
 among the 'gods? who zs like thee, to, 
 glorious in holiness, fearful 2 praises, 
 doing wonders? 
 
 flame going forth from the Presence of God. 
 ‘The Hebrew for stubble is also Egyptian. 
 
 8. This description has been strangely mis- 
 represented as though it were irreconcileable 
 with the preceding narrative. 
 that as lyric poetry differs in its imagery 
 from prose; and as inspired poetry it brings 
 us into contact with the hidden and effectual 
 causes of the natural phenomena, which it 
 still distinctly recognizes. ‘The blast of God’s 
 nostrils corresponds to the natural agency, 
 the east wind (ch. xiv. 21), which drove the 
 waters back. On each side the Psalmist de- 
 scribes what he must actually have seen: on 
 the north the waters rising high, overhanging 
 the sands, but kept back by the strong wind: 
 on the south lying in massive rollers, kept 
 down by the same agency in the heart, or deep 
 bed of the Red Sea. In both descriptions we 
 have precisely the same effects; in the former 
 the bearings upon the passage of the Israelites 
 are most prominent; in this the scenery is 
 presented in the form which impressed the 
 seer’s imagination most vividly, and which 
 fixes itself most strongly on the spirit of the 
 reader. 
 
 as an beap| The LXX. render this ‘‘as a 
 wall,” woet retyos. “The Hebrew word pro- 
 bably means ‘‘a dam.” It corresponds to 
 wall, xiv. 22. 
 
 9. The enemy said) The abrupt, gasping 
 utterances; the haste, cupidity and ferocity of 
 the Egyptians, the confusion and disorder of 
 their thoughts, are described in terms recog- 
 nized by critics of all schools as belonging to 
 the highest order of poetry; it must not be 
 forgotten that they enable us to realize the 
 feelings which induced Pharaoh and his host 
 to pursue the Israelites over the treacherous 
 sandbanks. 
 
 destroy them] ‘Thus Vulg., Targ., Saad. 
 and most modern critics. ‘The margin fol- 
 lows the LXX. and is defensible. 
 
 10. Thou didst blow with thy wind| 'The 
 solemn majesty of these few words, in imme- 
 diate contrast with the tumult and confusion 
 of the preceding verse, needs scarcely be no- 
 ticed: it is important to observe that Moses 
 here states distinctly the natural agency by 
 which the destruction was effected. In the 
 
 It differs from - 
 
 direct narrative, xiv. 28, we read only, ‘‘the 
 waters returned,” here we are told that it was 
 because the wind blew. A sudden change in 
 the direction of the wind would bring back at 
 once the masses of water heaped up on the 
 north. If the tide rose at the same time, the 
 waters of the Red Sea would meet and over- 
 whelm the host: but this is not said, and the 
 Egyptians, who were close observers of na- 
 tural phenomena, would probably have been 
 aware of the danger of attempting the passage 
 had flood-time been near at hand. One cause 
 is assigned and it suffices for the effect. 
 
 they sank as lead| See note on v. 4. The 
 sudden drowning of the charioteers as they 
 fell headlong in their heavy panoply must 
 have been one of the most striking features of 
 the scene: hence the repetition, not without a 
 variation, which gives a more exact simile: 
 they fell like masses of lead, helpless, motion- 
 less, unable for a moment to struggle with the 
 waters. 
 
 THIRD AND Last Division. After 
 the ascription of praise the seer turns to the 
 remoter, but certain consequences of this 
 unparalleled event. It was impossible that 
 aman in the position and with the feelings of 
 Moses should not revert to them, and at once 
 present them in clear strong language to His 
 people. ‘The deliverance was the earnest of a 
 complete fulfilment of old promises, it was a 
 pledge also that enemies, whom the Israelites 
 could not but dread as their superiors in the 
 arts and resources of war, would be dis- 
 heartened, and speedily overcome, and that 
 they themselves would be put in possession 
 of the inheritance of Abraham. 
 
 11. among the gods| The marg. has 
 ‘“‘mighty ones,” which is a possible rendering, 
 adopted in the Vulg. But the translation is 
 quite correct, and justified by other unmistake- 
 able passages; thus in Ps, Ixxxvi. 8, ‘‘Amorg 
 the gods there is none like unto Thee,” an 
 expression which by no means admits the sub- 
 stantial power of the objects of heathen wor- 
 ship, in which the Israelite recognized either 
 evil spirits or mere phantoms of superstitious 
 imagination; see especially Deut. xxxii. 16, 17. 
 A Hebrew just leaving the land in which 
 Polytheism attained its highest development, 
 with gigantic statues and temples of incom- 
 parable grandeur, might well on such an occa- 
 
 mighty 
 ones? 
 
v. 12—16.] EXODUS. XV. 
 
 12 Thou stretchedst out thy right 
 hand, the earth swallowed them. 
 
 13 Thou in thy mercy hast led 
 forth the people which thou hast re- 
 deemed: thou hast guided them in thy 
 
 | strength unto thy holy habitation. 
 Yeut.2, 14 Ihe ?people shall hear, and be 
 sh. 2. 9, afraid: sorrow shall take hold on the 
 
 313 
 
 be amazed; the mighty men of Moab, 
 trembling shall take hold upon them; 
 all the inhabitants of Canaan shall 
 melt away. 
 
 16 ©Fear and dread shall fall upon ¢ Deut. 2. 
 them; by the greatness of thine arm Jou. 2.5 
 they shall be as still as a stone; till 
 thy people pass over, O Lor», till the 
 
 inhabitants of Palestina. 
 
 15 Then the dukes of Edom shall 
 
 sion dwell upon this consummation of the long 
 series of triumphs by which the ‘greatness 
 beyond compare” of Jehovah was once for 
 all established, 
 
 12. the earth swallowed them] The state- 
 ment is general, not dwelling on the special 
 mode of the Egyptian overthrow, which had 
 already been fully treated, but serving to mark 
 the transition to a different subject, viz. the 
 effects of the deliverance upon Israel, 
 
 13. thou hast guided them, &c.| Two ob- 
 jections are made to this, as indicating a later 
 origin; (1) the use of the past tense; but Moses 
 naturally and correctly speaks of the guidance 
 as already begun, God had redeemed the 
 Israelites, and placed them in the way to- 
 wards Canaan. (2) The words ‘thy holy 
 habitation” are supposed to refer to the temple 
 at Jerusalem. It would not however be an 
 unsuitable designation for Palestine, regarded 
 as the land of promise, sanctified by mani- 
 festations of God to the Patriarchs, and de- 
 stined to be both the home of God’s people, 
 and the place where His glory and purposes 
 were to be perfectly revealed. It is clear that 
 no Hebrew writing before the time of Solomon 
 would have introduced a reference to the 
 temple, and improbable that any one writing 
 afterwards would have put an expression with 
 that meaning into the mouth of Moses. But 
 it is possible that Moses had Mount Moriah 
 in his mind, whether in remembrance of Abra- 
 ham’s offering, or as the result of an imme- 
 diate inspiration. If so it would be an instance 
 of that not uncommon and most interesting 
 form of prediction in which events separated 
 by a wide interval from the seer’s time are 
 realized as impending. Of all predictions such 
 are least likely to be attributed to any writer 
 after their long deferred fulfilment. 
 
 14. The people| or the peoples, an ex- 
 pression now justified by usage, and necessary 
 in this passage to give the true meaning. 
 
 the inhabitants of Palestina| In Hebrew Pe- 
 lasheth, i.e. the country of the Philistines. 
 They were the first who would expect an in- 
 vasion, and the first whose district would 
 have been invaded but for the faintheartedness 
 
 people pass over, which thou hast pur- 
 chased. 
 
 —— ae 
 
 of the Israelites. It is obvious that the order 
 of thoughts would have been very difterent had 
 the song been composed at a later period, 
 since in fact Philistia was the last district 
 occupied by the Israelites. 
 
 15. the dukes of Edom| The specific name 
 used in Genesis xxxvi. 15, where see note. 
 It denotes the chieftains, not the kings of 
 Edom: see also Dr W. Smith, ‘The Penta- 
 teuch,’ p. 385. 
 
 the mighty men of Moab| ‘The physical 
 strength and great stature of the Moabites are 
 noted in other passages: see Jer. xlviil. 29, 41. 
 
 Canaan} ‘The name in this, as in many pas- 
 sages of Genesis, designates the whole of Pa- 
 lestine: and is used of course with reference to 
 the promise to Abraham. It was known to 
 the Egyptians, and occurs frequently on the 
 monuments as Pa-kanana, which according to 
 M. Chabas designates only a large fortress in 
 Syria, but as most Egyptologers hold, and on 
 very solid grounds, applies, if not to the whole 
 of Palestine, yet to the northern district under 
 Lebanon, which the Phcenicians occupied and 
 called Canaan. 
 
 16. shall fall upon them| Most of the 
 ancient versions use the optative form. Let 
 fear and dread fall upon them, let them be 
 still, 7.e. motionless, as a stone: thus LXX, 
 Vulg. Such undoubtedly may be the meaning 
 of the Hebrew, but the future is equally, if 
 not more forcible; and the prediction is so 
 general that even those, who reject specific 
 announcements of future events, might accept 
 it as a natural expression of the anticipations 
 of Moses. An objection is taken by some 
 critics to the expression ‘‘pass over” as apply- 
 ing specially to the passage over Jordan; the 
 prophecy was doubtless then fulfilled, but that 
 event could not have been in the mind of Moses, 
 since he expected that the entrance would 
 be by the southern frontier; and the term 
 which he uses would be equally applicable to 
 any passing over the physical barriers of Ca- 
 naan; had indeed the song been composed 
 after that passage it is scarcely possible that 
 some allusion would not have been made to 
 the resemblance between the two miracles. 
 
17 Thou shalt bring them in, and 
 plant them in the mountain of thine 
 inheritance, im the place, O Lorp, 
 which thou hast made for thee to dwell 
 in, iz the Sanctuary, O Lord, which 
 thy hands have established. 
 
 18 ‘Ihe Lorp shall reign for ever 
 and ever. 
 
 19 For the horse of Pharaoh went 
 in with his chariots and with his horse- 
 men into thesea, and the Lorp brought 
 again the waters of the sea upon them ; 
 but the children of Israel. went on 
 dry /and in the midst of the sea. 
 
 17. in the mountain of thine inheritance] 
 See note on v. 13. The expressions in this 
 verse, especially the word Sanctuary, are in 
 favour of the explanation given in the latter 
 part of that note; but some critics (as Smith 
 ‘Pentateuch,’ p. 403, and Bleek, ‘ Einleitung,’ 
 p. 274) consider that Palestine is meant. 
 
 The psaim closes, not with the conquest of 
 Canaan, but with its ultimate and crowning 
 result, the settlement of the people of Jehovah 
 in the inheritance which he had promised, and 
 in the place which he destined for His Sanc- 
 tuary. 
 
 19. For the horse, &c.| ‘This verse does 
 not belong to the hymn, but marks the transi- 
 tion from it to the narrative. Writers, who 
 attribute different portions of the book to 
 various authors, consider that it belongs to the 
 original composition. It is however obviously 
 a summary statement of the cause and subject- 
 matter of the preceding hymn, and as such, 
 assumes its existence, 
 
 20 And Miriam the prophetess| The part 
 here assigned to Miriam and the women of 
 Israel is in accordance both with Egyptian 
 and Hebrew customs. ‘The men are repre- 
 sented as singing the hymn in chorus, under 
 the guidance of Moses; at each interval Mi- 
 riam and the women sang the refrain, mark- 
 ing the time with the timbrel, and with the 
 measured rhythmical movements always as- 
 sociated with solemn festivities. Compare 
 Judg. xi. 34, 1 Sam. xviii. 6, and 2 Sam. vi. 5. 
 A representation of women dancing, some 
 with boughs in their hand, others playing on 
 timbrels, or tambourines of various shapes, 
 some square and some round, is given by Wil- 
 kinson, ‘M. and C,’ x. p.93. ‘The word used 
 in this passage for the timbrel is Egyptian, and 
 judging from its etymology and the figures 
 which are joined with it in the inscriptions, 
 it was probably the round instrument. See 
 Brugsch, ‘D. H.’ p. 1323, and 1534. 
 
 EXODUS 
 
 [v. 17-22. 
 
 20 @ And Miriam the prophetess, 
 the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in 
 her hand; and all the women went 
 out after her with timbrels and with 
 dances. 
 
 21 And Miriam answered them, 
 Sing ye to the Lorp, for he hath— 
 triumphed gloriously; the horse and — 
 his rider hath he thrown into the sea. 
 
 22 So Moses brought Israel from 
 the Red sea, and they went out into 
 the wilderness of Shur; and they went 
 three days in the wilderness, and found 
 no water. 
 
 Miriam is called a prophetess, evidently, as 
 appears from Numbers xii. 2, because she and 
 Aaron had received divine communications. 
 The word is used here in its proper sense of 
 uttering words suggested by the Spirit of God. 
 On the use and meaning of the word see note 
 on Genesis xx. 7. She is called the sister of 
 Aaron, most probably to indicate her special 
 position as co-ordinate, not with Moses the 
 leader of the nation, but with his chief aid and 
 instrument. It is evident, however, that this 
 designation, most natural in the mouth of 
 Moses, who would be careful to record the 
 names of his brother and sister on such an 
 occasion, was not likely to have been applied 
 to Miriam by a later writer. 
 
 22. So Moses] Lit. And Moses. ‘The word 
 £0 gives the impression of a closer connection 
 with the preceding verse than is suggested by 
 the Hebrew. ‘The history of the journey 
 from the Red Sea to Sinai begins in fact with 
 this verse, which would more conveniently 
 have been the commencement of another 
 chapter. 
 
 JSrom the Red sea| 'The station where Moses 
 and his people halted to celebrate their de- 
 liverance is generally admitted to be the Ayoun 
 Musa, i.e. the fountains of Moses. It is the 
 only green spot near the passage over the Red 
 Sea. ‘There are several wells there (17 ac- 
 cording to Dr Stanley, p. 67, 7 according to 
 Robinson, p. 62). Tischendorf, whose descrip- 
 tion is fuller than that of other travellers and 
 gives a more pleasing impression, counted Ig, 
 and observes that the vegetation indicates a still 
 largernumber. ‘ Ausdemheiligen Lande,’ p. 22. 
 The water, like all the water on the western 
 coast of the Peninsula, is dark-coloured and 
 brackish, but it is drinkable, and is said to be 
 highly prized by the people of Suez, whose 
 richer inhabitants formerly built. country 
 houses, and laid out gardens in the place. At 
 present the German consul has a garden of 
 
iat is, 
 
 2FHESS. 
 
 cclus, 
 
 v. 23—26.] 
 
 23 4 And when they came to 
 Marah, they could not drink of the 
 waters of Marah, for they were bitter: 
 therefore the name of it was called 
 " Marah. 
 
 24 And the people murmured 
 -against Moses, saying, What shall we 
 drink ?. . 
 
 25 And he cried unto the Lorp; 
 and the Lorp shewed him a “tree, 
 which when he had cast into the 
 waters, the waters were made sweet: 
 
 considerable extent and beauty, described by 
 Tischendorf. Welisted found there about 
 twenty clumps of palm-trees, the branches of 
 which were so closely interwoven that they 
 formed a dense impervious shade, affording 
 shelter tothe Arabs. According to M. Monge 
 (quoted by Robinson, p. 62) there was for- 
 merly an aqueduct extending to the sea so as 
 to form a watering place for ships. In the 
 time of Moses the wells were probably inclosed 
 and kept with great care by the Egyptians, for 
 the use of the frequent convoys to and from 
 their ancient settlements at Sarbut el Khadem 
 and the Wady Mughara. 
 
 the wilderness of Shur| This name belongs 
 to the whole district between the north-eastern 
 frontier of Egypt and Palestine. ‘The word 
 is undoubtedly Egyptian, whether derived 
 from the name of the fortress on the frontier, 
 called the Fort of Zor, or more probably from 
 the word Khar, which designated all the 
 country between Egypt and Syria proper. 
 Thusin a papyrus of the rgth dynasty (‘ Anast.’ 
 Ui. 1, 1. 7) we read ‘The land of Khar from 
 Zor to Aup,” a city in Syria. ‘Kh’ and ‘Sh’ 
 are constantly interchanged in transcrip- 
 tion:<see Chabas, ‘V. E.’ p. 97. In Numbers 
 XXxlil. 8, the more special designation is used, 
 viz. ‘‘the wilderness of Etham,”’ a strong corro- 
 boration of the view that Etham was not on 
 the west of the Bitter lakes, but at their north- 
 ern extremity. 
 
 three days| ‘The distance between Ayoun 
 Musa and Huwara, the first spot where any 
 water is found on the route, is 33 geographical 
 miles. A small fountain Abu Suweira, near 
 the sea, and another called :he Cup of Sudr 
 on the east, some hours distant from the road, 
 were of course known to Moses, but would 
 be of little, if any use to the host. The whole 
 district is a tract of sand, or rough gravel ; 
 the wadys are depressions in the desert, with 
 only a few scattered herbs and shrubs, wither- 
 ed and parched by drought: the road after- 
 wards continues through hills of limestone 
 equally destitute of vegetation, some exhibit- 
 
 ERO DUS: DOV 
 
 there he made for them a statute and 
 an ordinance, and there he proved 
 them, 
 
 26 And said, If thou wilt diligently 
 hearken to the voice of the Lorp thy 
 God, and wilt do that which is right 
 in his sight, and wilt give ear to his 
 commandments, and keep all his sta- 
 tutes, I will put none of these diseases 
 upon thee, which I have brought upon 
 the Egyptians: for I am the Lorp 
 that healeth thee. 
 
 ing an abundance of crystallized sulphate of 
 lime. 
 
 23. Marah| ‘The identification of Ma- 
 rah with the fount of Huwara, first proposed 
 by Burckhardt, is now generally accepted. 
 The fountain rises from a large mound, a 
 whitish petrifaction, deposited by the water. 
 At present no water flows, but there are traces 
 of a running stream, and in the time of Moses, 
 when the road was kept by the Egyptians and 
 vegetation was more abundant, the source was 
 probably far more copious. The water is 
 considered by the Arabians to be the worst in 
 the whole district. ‘Two stunted palm-trees 
 now stand near it, and the ground is covered 
 by thickeis of the ghurkud (Peganum retusum, 
 Forskal), a low bushy thorny shrub, produ- 
 cing a small fruit which ripens in June, not 
 unlike the barberry, very juicy and slightly 
 acidulous; see Robinson, p. 66. Burckhardt, 
 ‘Syria,’ p. 474, suggested that the juice might 
 possibly be used to sweeten the water, but no 
 such process is known to the Bedouins, and 
 the fruit would not be ripe about Easter, 
 when the Israelites reached the place. Wellsted 
 observes that when he tasted the water and 
 muttered the word ‘‘ Marah” his Bedouin said 
 ‘You speak the word of truth: they are 
 indeed Mara.” ‘The Arabic word Huwara 
 means “ruin,” ‘‘destruction” (Freytag); but 
 ‘‘bitter” and ‘‘deadly” are with the Arabs, as 
 with the Hebrews, convertible terms. 
 
 25. a tree] ‘The statement evidently 
 points to a natural agency. ‘The miracle was 
 not wrought without the tree. ‘This is in 
 accordance with the whole spirit of the narra- 
 tive. There may possibly have been some 
 resemblance to a mode of purifying stagnant 
 waters, such as Josephus and Du Boys Aimé 
 describe, by thrusting long sticks into the 
 bottom of a spring and eliciting a fresh supply: 
 but the result was manifestly supernatural. 
 
 he made, &c.| The Lord then set before them 
 the fundamental principle of implicit trust, to 
 be shewn by obedience, The healing of the 
 water was a symbol of deliverance from phy- 
 sical and spiritual evils, 
 
316 
 
 € Numb. 
 33+ D 
 
 27 4 «And they came to Elim, 
 where were twelve wells of water, and 
 three score and ten palm trees: and 
 they encamped there by the waters. 
 
 CHAR DERI © 
 
 1 The Israelites come to Sin. 2 They murmur 
 for want of bread. 4 God promiseth them 
 bread from heaven. 11 Quails are sent, 14 
 and manna. 16 The ordering of manna. 
 25 It was not to be found on the sabbath. 32 
 An omer of it is preserved. 
 
 ND they took their journey from 
 
 Elim, and all the congregation 
 
 of the children of Israel came unto 
 
 the wilderness of Sin, which zs be- 
 
 tween Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth 
 
 day of the second month after their 
 departing out of the land of Egypt. 
 
 27. lim] At a distance of two hours’ 
 journey south of Huwara is the large and 
 beautiful valley of Gharandel (Girondel, Nie- 
 buhr, p. 183). In the rainy season a con- 
 siderable torrent flows through it, discharging 
 its waters in the Red Sea. Even in the dry 
 season water is still found, which though 
 somewhat brackish after long drought (Robin- 
 son), is generally good, and according to all 
 travellers the best on the whole journey from 
 Cairo to Sinai. ‘The grass there grows thick 
 and high, there is abundance of brush- 
 wood, with tamarisks and acacias; a few palm- 
 trees still remain, relics of the fair grove which 
 once covered this Oasis of the western side of 
 the Peninsula. ‘The only objection to the 
 identification of this valley with Elim is the 
 shortness of the distance, but the inducement 
 for the encampment is obvious, and no other 
 site corresponds with the main conditions of the 
 narrative. ‘The Israelites remained a consider- 
 able time in this neighbourhood, since they did 
 not reach the wilderness of Sin till two months 
 and a half after leaving Suez. ‘They would 
 find water and pasturage in the district between 
 Elim and the station on the Red Sea, mentioned 
 in Numbers xxxiil. 10: which appears to have 
 been at the further end of the Wadi ‘Tayibe, 
 a journey of eight hours, near the headland of 
 Ras Selima. ‘The whole valley is said to be 
 beautiful, full of tamarisks and other shrubs, 
 the Tarfa-tree and the Palm. Water is found 
 in it, though far inferior to that in Gharandel. 
 The station at the Red Sea then visited by the 
 Israelites was of considerable importance, the 
 starting point for the roads to the copper- 
 mines of the Wadi Mughara, Sarbut el Kha- 
 dem, and the Wadi Nasb. 
 
 twelve wells] Read springs; the He- 
 brew denotes natural sources. ‘These springs 
 may have been perennial when a richer vege- 
 
 ERO DUS ava 
 
 [v. 27—5. 
 
 2 And the whole congregation of 
 the children of Israel murmured against 
 Moses and Aaron in the wilderness: 
 
 3 And the children of Israel said 
 unto them, Would to God we had 
 died by the hand of the Lorp in the 
 land of Egypt, when we sat by the 
 flesh pots, and when we did eat bread 
 to the full; for ye have brought us 
 forth into this wilderness, to kill this . 
 whole assembly with hunger. 
 
 4 4 Then said the Lorp unto Mo- 
 ses, Behold, I will rain bread from 
 heaven for you; and the people shall 
 go out and gather ‘a certain rate every 
 day, that I may prove them, whether 
 they will walk in my law, or no. 
 
 5 And it shall come to pass, that 
 
 tation clothed the adjacent heights. ‘They cer- 
 tainly supplied copious streams when the Is- 
 raelites ‘‘encamped there by the waters.” 
 
 Cuap. XVI. 1. the wilderness of Sin) 
 The desert tract, called Debbet er Ramleh, 
 extends nearly across the peninsula from the 
 Wady Nasb in a south-easterly direction, be- 
 tween the limestone district of E] Tih and the 
 granite of Sinai. The journey from the station 
 at Elim, or even from that on the Red Sea, 
 could be performed in a day: at that time the 
 route was kept in good condition by the 
 Egyptians who worked the copper-mines at 
 Sarbut el Khadim. ‘The text seems to imply 
 that the Israelites proceeded in detachments, 
 and were first assembled as a complete host 
 when they reached the wilderness of Sin. 
 
 2. murmured| ‘The want of food was 
 first felt after six weeks from the time of the 
 departure from Egypt, see v. 1: we have no 
 notice previously of any deficiency of bread. 
 
 3. by the hand of the Lorp]| ‘This evi- 
 dently refers to the plagues, especially the last, 
 in Egypt: the death which befell the Egyp- 
 tians appeared to the people preferable to the 
 sufferings of famine. 
 
 Jiesh pots, and.,.bread| ‘These expressions 
 prove that the servile labours to which they 
 had been subjected did not involve privation: 
 they were fed abundantly, either by the offi- 
 cials of Pharaoh, or more probably by the 
 produce of their own fertile district. The 
 word used for flesh-pots is Egyptian, the 
 name and representation are given in Brugsch, 
 “Ds HO ps 2764. 
 
 4. rain bread from heaven| This marks 
 at the outset the strictly supernatural character 
 of the supply. Without such supply the vast 
 host of the Israelites could not have subsisted 
 
 t Heb. 
 
 the por- 
 tion of a 
 day in his 
 da 
 
v. 6—14.] 
 
 on the sixth day they shall prepare 
 that which they bring in; and it shall 
 be twice as much as they gather daily. 
 
 6 And Moses and Aaron said unto 
 all the children of Israel, At even, 
 then ye shall know that the Lorp 
 hath brought you out from the land 
 of Egypt: 
 
 7 And in the morning, then ye shall 
 see the glory of the Lorn; for that 
 he heareth your murmurings against 
 the Lorp: and what are we, that ye 
 murmur against us? 
 
 8 And Moses said, This shall be, 
 when the Lorp shall give you in the 
 evening flesh to eat, and in the morn- 
 ing bread to the full; for that the 
 Lorp heareth your murmurings which 
 ye murmur against him: and what are 
 we? your murmurings are not against 
 us, but against the Lorn. 
 
 9 { And Moses spake unto Aaron, 
 Say unto all the congregation of the 
 
 for a considerable time in any part of the 
 Peninsula. 
 
 a@ certain rate every day| Lit. as in the 
 margin, ‘‘the portion of a day in its day:” 
 i.e. the quantity sufficient for one day’s con- 
 sumption: this may be better expressed ‘‘a 
 day’s portion each day.” 
 
 that I may prove them] ‘The trial consisted 
 in the restriction to the supply of their daily 
 wants. 
 
 5. it shall be twice as much| The meaning 
 evidently is that they should collect and prepare 
 a double quantity, not (as has been assumed, 
 in order to make out a contradiction with 
 v. 22) that the quantity collected would be 
 miraculously increased afterwards. 
 
 7. the glory of the Lorp| Some com- 
 mentators understand this to mean the mani- 
 festation of His power and goodness in sup- 
 plying the people with food; but it refers to 
 the visible appearance described in x. ro. 
 
 8. mot against us| i.e. according to a 
 common Hebrew idiom, not so much against 
 us as against the Lord; the murmuring im- 
 plied a distrust of the people in the divine 
 mission of their leaders, notwithstanding the 
 previous miracles. 
 
 9. The preceding paragraph from wv. 3 
 describes the conference between the people 
 and their leaders: the result was a summons 
 to meet Him whom they represented, 7. e. to 
 
 EXODUS. XVI. 317 
 
 children of Israel, Come near before 
 the Lorp: for he hath heard your 
 murmurings. 
 
 10 And it came to pass, as Aaron 
 spake unto the whole congregation of 
 the children of Israel, that they looked 
 toward the wilderness, and, behold, 
 the glory of the Lorp “appeared in ¢ chap. 13. 
 the cloud. a 
 
 tr 4 And the Lorp spake unto 
 Moses, saying, 
 
 12 I have heard the murmurings 
 of the children of Israel: speak unto 
 them, saying, At even ye shall eat 
 flesh, and in the morning ye shall be 
 filled with bread; and ye shall know 
 that I am the Lorp your God. 
 
 13 And it came to pass, that at 
 even ’the quails came up, and covered ¢ Numb. 
 
 ; . . Tir oes 
 the camp: and in the morning the,y°.., 
 
 dew lay round about the host. II. 7. 
 14 And when ‘the dew that lay 24. 
 
 Mae 
 was gone up, behold, upon the face of )Ys* *® 
 
 assemble in the open space before the taber- 
 nacle. 
 
 10. appeared in the cloud) Or, ‘‘ was seen in 
 a cloud.” The definite article would imply that 
 the cloud was the same which is often men- 
 tioned in connection with the tabernacle. The 
 people saw the cloud here spoken of beyond 
 the camp. 
 
 12. jflesh...bread| ‘These expressions re- 
 fer to the previous murmuring of the people, 
 v. 3. God gives them in His own way that 
 which they longed for: this is a clear proof 
 that the narrative is continuous and that the 
 preceding passage is not (as Knobel assumes) 
 an interpolation: see also notes on vv, 16 
 and 27. 
 
 13. quails| ‘The identification of the 
 Hebrew, ‘‘slav,” with the common quail 
 may be assumed as certain. ‘The name is ap- 
 plied in Arabic to that bird: it migrates in 
 immense numbers in spring from the south: it 
 is nowhere more common than in the neigh- 
 bourhood of the Red Sea. When exhausted 
 by a long flight it is easily captured even with 
 the hand. ‘The flesh is palatable and not un- 
 wholesome when eaten in moderation. In this 
 passage we read of a single flight so dense 
 that it covered the encampment. The miracle 
 consisted in the precise time of the arrival and 
 its coincidence with the announcement. Other 
 explanations of the name have been given, but 
 this alone meets all the conditions. 
 
 the dew lay round] Lit. ‘‘a lying of dew 
 
218 
 
 the wilderness there Jay a small round 
 thing, as small as the hoar frost on 
 the ground. 
 15 And when the children of Israel 
 Or, |. Saw it, they said one to another, ‘it 
 this? or, is Manna: for they wist not what it 
 
 eek was, And Moses said unto them, 
 
 so" #This is the bread which the Lorp 
 
 1 Cor. 10. hath given you to eat. 
 
 Ee 16 4 This zs the thing which the 
 Lorp hath commanded, Gather of it 
 
 es ‘pout, EVETY fae according to ‘his eating, an 
 
 or, head.’ omer ‘for every man, according to the 
 
 we ~~ number of your 'persons; take ye 
 
 souls, 
 
 round the camp.” ‘This is generally under- 
 stood to mean there was a heavy fall of dew 
 round the encampment. Knobel explains it 
 to be a dense mist, but the usage seems to be 
 that which is recognized by the Authorised 
 Version and all the ancient versions. ‘There 
 are many indications that the season was unu- 
 sually humid, natural agencies concurring with 
 supernatural interpositions. Manna is found 
 in abundance in wet seasons, in dry seasons it 
 ceases altogether. 
 
 On Manna, see note at the end of the chapter. 
 
 14. a small round thing) ‘The meaning of 
 the Hebrew is questioned (see note below), 
 but there is good authority for our version, 
 which is true to nature: manna appears in 
 small, compact grains. Here we have a re- 
 semblance in shape and appearance, but natu- 
 ral manna is not found on the open plain, 
 ‘* the face of the wilderness,” but on dry leaves, 
 or the ground under the tamarisk, from the 
 trunk and branches of which it exudes. 
 
 15. It is manna| ‘This rendering is dis- 
 puted. ‘The Old Versions concur in render- 
 ing the phrase ‘‘ What is this?” But oriental 
 scholars are generally agreed that this explana- 
 tion is not borne out by ancient usage, and 
 that the Israelites said ‘‘ this is man.” ‘The 
 word ‘‘ man” they explain by reference to the 
 Arabic, in which it means ‘‘ gift.” The Egyp- 
 tian language seems to afford the true solution. 
 It has been very lately shown that ‘‘man” or 
 man-hut, ze. white manna, was the name 
 under which the substance was known to the 
 Egyptians, and therefore to the Israelites; 
 see note below. When they saw it on the 
 ground they would of course at once recog- 
 nize it. ‘They wist not what it was: for in 
 fact it was not natural manna, but a heavenly 
 gift. Our Version should therefore be retained, 
 and the passage may be thus explained. When 
 the Israelites saw the small round thing, they 
 said at once ‘‘this is manna,” but with an 
 
 EXODUS UAME 
 
 [v. 15—20. 
 
 every man for them which are in his 
 tents. 
 
 17 And the children of Israel did 
 so, and gathered, some more, some 
 less. 
 
 18 And when they did mete zt with « 2 Cor. s. 
 an omer, “he that gathered much had * 
 nothing over, and he that gathered 
 little had no lack; they gathered ove 
 man according to his eating. 
 
 19 And Moses said, Let no man 
 leave of it till the morning, 
 
 20 Notwithstanding they hearkened 
 not unto Moses; but some of them 
 
 - 
 
 exclamation of surprise at finding it on the 
 open plain, in such immense quantities, under 
 circumstances so unlike what they could have 
 expected: in fact they did not know what it 
 really was, only what it resembled. 
 
 16. according to his eating| ‘This refers 
 to v. 4; it was a trial of the faith of the people, 
 since they were to gather just enough fora 
 day’s consumption. ‘The reference is notice- 
 able as an additional argument against Kno- 
 bel’s assumption of an interpolation; see note 
 on v, 12. 
 
 an omer| i.e. the tenth part of an Ephah, 
 see v. 36. ‘The exact quantity cannot be de- 
 termined, since the measures varied at different 
 times. Josephus makes the omer equal to six 
 cotyle, or half-pints. ‘The ephah was an 
 Egyptian measure, supposed to be about a 
 bushel or one-third of a hin. See Brugsch, 
 ‘D.H.’ pp. 49, 50. The word omer, in this 
 sense, occurs in no other passage. It was 
 probably not used at a later period, belong- 
 ing, hke many other words, to the time of 
 Moses. It is found in old Egyptian, but with 
 the meaning ‘‘ storehouse” (see Birch, ‘D. H.’ 
 p. 363. Brugsch does not give it). See Lev. 
 x1x. 36. 
 
 man...persons| Lit. as in the margin, 
 head, and souls, which should be retained 
 as in many other passages. 
 
 17. some more, some less| It is evidently 
 implied that the people were in part at least 
 disobedient and failed in this first trial. 
 
 18. had nothing over| ‘The result is un- 
 doubtedly represented as miraculous. ‘The 
 Jewish interpreters understand by this state- 
 ment that whatever quantity each person had 
 gathered, when he measured it in his tent, he 
 found that he had just as many omers as he 
 needed for the consumption of his family: and 
 this is probably the true meaning. It is adopt- 
 ed by Knobel and Keil. 
 
 20. it bred worms] ‘This result was super- 
 
Vv. 2I—29. | 
 
 left of it until the morning, and it 
 bred worms, and stank: and Moses 
 was wroth with them. 
 
 21 And they gathered it every 
 morning, every man according to his 
 eating: and when the sun waxed hot, 
 it melted. 
 
 22 4 And it came to pass, that on 
 the sixth day they gathered twice as 
 much bread, two omers for one man: 
 and all the rulers of the congregation 
 came and told Moses. 
 
 23 And he said unto them, This 
 is that which the Lorp hath said, 
 To morrow is the rest of the holy 
 sabbath unto the Lorn: bake that 
 which ye will bake to day, and seethe 
 that ye will seethe; and that which 
 remaineth over lay up for you to be 
 kept until the morning. 
 
 ee 
 
 natural ; no such tendency to rapid decompo- 
 _ sition is recorded of common manna. 
 
 21. it melted] ‘This refers to the manna 
 which was not gathered. It is noted in all 
 accounts of common manna that it is melted 
 by the heat of the sun. 
 
 22. twice as much bread| ‘This was in 
 accordance with God’s command to Moses 
 v. 5, which it is not probable he had omitted 
 to communicate to the people, though the fact 
 is unnoticed in the narrative. ‘The rulers of 
 the congregation appear to have applied to 
 Moses for instructions as to what was to be 
 done under these circumstances, fearing pos- 
 sibly the recurrence of the result mentioned 
 above, v.20. Knobel supposes that the people 
 acted unconsciously, God permitting them to 
 gather a double quantity, but the other expla- 
 nation is far more natural. 
 
 From this passage and from w. 5 it is infer- 
 red that the seventh day was previously known 
 to the people as a day separate from all others, 
 and if so, it must have been observed as an 
 ancient and primeval institution. No other 
 account of the command (given without any 
 special explanation), or of the conduct of the 
 people, who collected the manna, is satisfactory: 
 thus Rosenmiiller, and others. It is at the 
 same time evident that Moses took this oppor- 
 tunity of enforcing a strict and more solemn 
 observance of the day. 
 
 23. To morrow is the rest of the holy 
 sabbath unto the Lorp| Or, To-morfow is 
 a rest, a Sabbath holy to Jehovah: 
 i.e. to-morrow must be a day of rest, ob- 
 served strictly as a sabbath, or festal rest, holy 
 to Jehovah, It is at once a statement, and an 
 
 Fee) TO Sy ONT: 
 
 24 And they laid it up till the morn- 
 ing, as Moses bade: and it did not 
 stink, neither was there any worm 
 therein. 
 
 25 And Moses said, Eat that to 
 day; for to day zs a sabbath unto the 
 Lorp: to day ye shall not find it in 
 the field. 
 
 26 Six days ye shall gather it; but 
 on the seventh day, which is the sab- 
 bath, in it there shall be none. 
 
 27 4 And it came to pass, that 
 there went out some of the people on 
 the seventh day for to gather, and 
 they found none. 
 
 28 And the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 How long refuse ye to keep my com- 
 mandments and my laws? 
 
 29 See, for that the Lorn hath given 
 you the sabbath, therefore he giveth 
 
 injunction. ‘The people knew it as the Sab- 
 bath, they were to observe it as a great fes- 
 tival. 
 
 bake, &c.| ‘These directions shew that the 
 manna thus given differed essentially from the 
 natural product. Here and in Numbers:xi. 8 
 it is treated in a way which shews it had the 
 properties of corn, could be ground in a 
 mortar, baked and boiled. Ordinary manna 
 is used as honey, it cannot be ground, it melts 
 when exposed to a moderate heat forming a 
 substance like barley sugar, called manna tabu- 
 lata. In Persia it is boiled with water and 
 brought to the consistency of honey. The 
 Arabs also boil the leaves to which it adheres, 
 and the manna thus dissolved floats on the 
 water as a glutinous or oily substance (Rosen- 
 miiller, Niebuhr, &c.). It is obvious that 
 these accounts are inapplicable to the manna 
 from heaven, which had the characteristics 
 and nutritive properties of bread. 
 
 25. at that to day| The practical ob- 
 servance of the Sabbath was thus formally in- 
 stituted before the giving of the law. ‘The 
 people were to abstain from the ordinary 
 work of every-day life: they were not to col- 
 lect food, nor, as it would seem, even to pre- 
 pare it as on other days. 
 
 27. there went out some of the people] 
 This was an act of wilful disobedience. It 
 is remarkable, being the first violation of the 
 express command, that it was not visited by a 
 signal chastisement: the rest and peace of the 
 ‘‘Holy Sabbath” were not disturbed by a 
 manifestation of wrath. 
 
 28. How long] The reference to v. 4 is 
 obvious. ‘The prohibition involved a trial of 
 
320 
 
 you on the sixth day the bread of two 
 days; abide ye every man in his place, 
 let no man go out of his place on the 
 seventh day. 
 
 30 So the people rested on the 
 seventh day. 
 
 31 And the house of Israel called 
 the name thereof Manna: and it was 
 like coriander seed, white; and the 
 taste of it was like wafers made with 
 honey. 
 
 32 4 And Moses said, This zs the 
 thing which the Lorp commandeth, 
 Fill an omer of it to be kept for your 
 generations; that they may see the 
 bread wherewith I have fed you in 
 
 faith, in which as usual the people were found 
 wanting. Every miracle formed some part, so 
 to speak, of an educational process. 
 
 29. abide ye every man in his place| This 
 is an additional injunction. ‘They were to 
 remain within the camp. ‘The expression in 
 Hebrew is peculiar and seems almost to enjoin 
 a position of complete repose, ‘‘in his place,” 
 lit. under himself, as the Oriental sits with his 
 legs drawn up under him. The prohibition 
 must however be understood with reference to 
 its immediate object; they were not to go forth 
 from their place in order to gather manna, 
 which was on other days without the camp. 
 The spirit of the law is sacred rest. The 
 Lord gave them this Sabbath, as a blessing 
 and privilege. It was ‘‘made for man.” A 
 Jewish sect called Masbothei, i.e. Sabbatarians, 
 took this text as a command that no man 
 should change his position from the morning 
 to the evening of the Sabbath; see Routh on 
 * Hegesippus,’ R. S. I. p. 225. 
 
 31. Manna] This refers of course to 
 their first exclamation, confirmed after a 
 week’s experience. It was not indeed the 
 common manna, as they then seem to have 
 believed, but the properties which are noted 
 in this passage are common to it and the natu- 
 ral product: in size, form and colour it re- 
 sembled the seed of the white coriander, a 
 small round grain of a whitish or yellowish 
 grey. ‘The wafer made with honey is called 
 by the LXX. éyxpis év pédutt, é.e. according 
 to Athenzus a cake of meal, oil and honey. 
 
 32. Fill an omer| ‘This was probably 
 done at the end of the first week; but the 
 order to Aaron may have been repeated when 
 the tabernacle was fitted up with its appur- 
 tenances. 
 
 33. a pot] The word here used occurs 
 in no other passage. It corresponds in form 
 and use to the Egyptian for a casket or vase 
 
 EXODUS Sane k 
 
 [v. 30—36. 
 
 the wilderness, when I brought you 
 forth from the land of Egypt. . 
 
 33 And Moses said unto Aaron, 
 Take a pot, and put an omer full of 
 manna therein, and lay it up before the 
 Lorp, to be kept for your generations. 
 
 34 As the Lorp commanded Mo- 
 ses, so Aaron laid it up before the 
 Testimony, to be kept. 
 
 35 And the children of Israel did 
 
 ay 
 
 . : 
 eat manna forty years, /until they rJosh 5 
 
 came to a land inhabited; they did 
 eat manna, until they came unto the 
 borders of the land of Canaan. 
 
 36 Now an omer zs the tenth part 
 of an ephah. 
 
 in which oblations were presented. Br. D. H. 
 p. 1644. 
 
 35. did eat manna forty years| This 
 does not necessarily imply that the Israelites 
 were fed exclusively on manna, or that the 
 supply was continuous during forty years: 
 but that whenever it might be needed, owing 
 to the total or partial failure of other food, it 
 Was given until they entered the promised land. 
 They had numerous flocks and herds, which 
 were not slaughtered (see Numbers xi. 22), 
 but which gave them milk, cheese and of 
 course a limited supply of flesh: nor is there 
 any reason to suppose that during a consider- 
 able part of that time they may not have 
 cultivated some spots of fertile ground in 
 the wilderness. We may assume, as in most 
 cases of miracle, that the supernatural supply 
 was commensurate with their actual necessity. 
 
 Dr W. Smith, p. 365, observes the peculiarity. 
 
 of the expression. Moses gives a complete 
 history of manna till the end of his own life. 
 The manna was not withheld in fact until the 
 Israelites had passed the Jordan. Moses writes 
 as a historian, not as a prophet. What he 
 knew as fact was that it lasted until he penned 
 this passage. A later writer would have been 
 more specific. 
 
 36. an omer] This definition of an omer 
 has been attributed to a later hand, a gloss 
 inserted to explain an obsolete word, ‘‘omer” 
 occurring only in this passage as the name of 
 a measure; on the other hand, it has been 
 argued that Moses, as a legislator, would be 
 careful to define what was probably a new 
 measure; both omer and ephah are Egyptian 
 words. 
 
 NOTE ON MANNA. 
 It is well to bring together the facts 
 which are certainly known from ancient and 
 modern authorities. ‘They leave no doubt, 
 
 on the one hand, as to the connection between 
 
 nape ie yl Se 
 
 I2. 
 Neh. 9. 15. 
 
B2RODUS. XV 1. 
 
 the manna of Exodus and the natural produc- 
 tion: or on the other, as to the supernatural 
 character of the tormer. Both points are 
 admitted alike by critics who believe, or dis- 
 believe the sacred narrative: the only question 
 between them is the truth of the writer; his 
 intention and meaning are unmistakeable. 
 
 The manna of the Peninsula of Sinai is the 
 sweet juice of the Tarfa, a species of tamarisk. 
 It exudes from the trunk and branches in hot 
 weather, and forms small round white grains. 
 In cool weather it preserves its consistency, 
 in hot weather it melts rapidly. It is either 
 gathered from the twigs of the tamarisk, or 
 from the fallen leaves underneath the tree. 
 The colour is a greyish yellow. It begins to 
 exude in May, and lasts about six weeks. 
 The Arabs cleanse it from leaves and dirt, 
 boil it down, strain it through coarse stuff 
 and keep it in leather bags: they use it as 
 honey with bread. Its taste is sweet, with a 
 slight aromatic flavour: travellers generally 
 compare it with honey. According to Ehren- 
 berg it is produced by the puncture of an 
 insect. It is abundant in rainy seasons, many 
 years it ceases altogether. The whole quan- 
 tity now produced in a single year does not 
 exceed 600 or 700 pounds. It is found in the 
 district between the W ady Gharandel, z.e. Elim, 
 and Sinai, in the Wady Sheich, and in some 
 other parts of the Peninsula. For each of 
 these statements we have the concurrent testi- 
 mony of travellers. Seetzen in 1807 was the 
 first who described the natural product with 
 scientific accuracy: see Kruse’s notes on Seet- 
 zen, Vol. Iv. p. 416. ‘The resemblance in 
 colour, shape, taste, and in the time and place 
 of the appearance is exact. ‘The name is also 
 that now given to the product, well known 
 as its Arabic designation, and, as we have 
 shewn, found also on Egyptian monuments. 
 
 The differences however are equally unmis- 
 takeable. 
 found under the tamarisk tree, but on the 
 surface of the wilderness, after the disappear- 
 ance of the morning dew. 2. The quantity 
 which was gathered in a single day far ex- 
 ceeded the annual produce at present, and 
 probably at the time of Moses. 3. The supply 
 ceased on the Sabbath-day. 4. The properties 
 differed from common manna; it could be 
 ground, baked, and in other respects treated 
 like meal. It was not used merely as a con- 
 diment, or medicine, but had the nutritive 
 qualities of bread. 5. It was found after 
 leaving the district where it is now produced, 
 until the Israelites reached the land of Canaan. 
 
 It is to- be observed that we have all the 
 conditions and characteristics of Divine inter- 
 positions. (1) The condition of a recognized 
 necessity: for all writers agree that under any 
 conceivable circumstances the preservation of 
 the Israelites would otherwise have been im- 
 possible. (2) The condition of a harmony 
 
 VoL. I. 
 
 1. The manna of Exodus was not 
 
 with a Divine purpose, the preservation of a 
 peculiar people on which the whole scheme 
 of providential government and the salvation 
 of mankind depended. (3) We have the usual 
 characteristics of harmony between the natu- 
 ral order of events and the supernatural trans- 
 action. God fed His people not with the 
 food which belonged to other regions, but 
 with such as appertained to the district. The 
 local colouring is unmistakeable. We may 
 not attempt to give an explanation how the 
 change was effected; to such a question we 
 have but to answer that we know nothing. 
 One thing certain is, that if Moses wrote this 
 narrative, it is impossible that he could be 
 deceived, and equally impossible that he could 
 have deceived contemporaries and eye-wit- 
 nesses. As for ourselves, we must be content 
 to bear the reproach that we are satisfied with 
 a reference to the Almightiness of Jehovah, 
 in which alone faith finds any explanation of 
 the mystery of the universe. 
 
 DaDND. LXX. deel xoptoy Aevxov, Vulg. 
 quasi pilo tusum. Ch. spi, and Syr. 
 
 ASo, decorticatum. Saad. — yoke 
 2 CA z 
 round. These renderings seem to be conjectu- 
 ral. Gesenius derives the word from ,_ ¢,..5 : 
 
 Chal. DAN to peel: and explains the phrase 
 ‘¢a smail thing, as something peeled.” This 
 explanation has in its favour the Egyptian 
 usage, in which ‘‘heseb” means ‘ peel.” 
 Brugsch, ‘D.H.’ p. 994. Knobel points out 
 that in that case a particle of comparison 
 
 would be required, and compares (a Study 
 
 frost, hoar-frost, understanding it to describe 
 a small compact granular substance. In this 
 he is followed by Keil. 
 
 {3 is the Chaldaic form for M9, what? 
 but there is no vestige of the use in the ancient 
 language. ‘Thus Gesenius and Knobel; Keil 
 assumes it to be the popular, and old Semitic 
 form, but gives no proof. The meanjng “ gift” 
 was first suggested by Kimchi, p2m) 13N0, 
 gift and portion. Gesenius derives it from 
 i139, todistribute or apportion. ‘The Arabic 
 
 we (mann) is adduced in support of the 
 
 meaning ‘‘ gift,” but as Keil points out it is 
 probably taken from the Hebrew Manna. 
 Kalisch mentions the conjecture of Rashbam 
 that the word was probably Egyptian, for 
 which, as he observes truly, no proof could 
 be adduced. ‘The conjecture was a happy 
 one, and the proof is now found. Brugsch 
 gives the word, see ‘D. H.’ p. 655. ‘‘ Men- 
 nu,” ‘identical with the Hebrew 115, Arabic 
 
 ”’ It is found among other articles in a 
 
 basket of oblations at Apollinopolis. Under 
 another form it appears as Mannu-hut, ze. 
 white Manna, and is described as the pro- 
 duct of a tree, probably a species of Tamarisk, 
 
 x 
 
> 
 re) 
 
 & Numb. 
 
 20. 4. 
 
 CHAPTER XVII. 
 
 1 The people murmur for water at Rephidim. 
 5 God sendeth him for water to the rock in 
 fToreb. 8 Amalek 1s overcome by the holding 
 up of Moses’ hands. 15 Moses buildeth the 
 altar Fehovah-nisst. 
 
 ND all the congregation of the 
 
 children of Israel journeyed 
 
 from the wilderness of Sin, after their 
 
 journeys, according to the command- 
 
 ment of the Lorp, and pitched in 
 
 Rephidim: and there was no water for 
 the people to drink. 
 
 2, Wherefore “the people did chide 
 with Moses, and said, Give us water 
 that we may drink. And Moses said 
 unto them, Why chide ye with me? 
 wherefore do ye tempt the Lorp? 
 
 3 And the people thirsted there for 
 water; and the people murmured 
 against Moses, and said, Wherefore 
 is this that thou hast brought us up out 
 
 Cuap. XVII. 1. according to their jour- 
 neys| ‘The Israelites rested at two stations 
 before they reached Rephidim, viz. Dophkah 
 and Alush: see Numbers xxxuli. 12—14. Ac- 
 cording to Knobel, whose view is adopted 
 by Keil, and appears, on the whole, to 
 accord best with the Biblical notices and 
 the accounts of travellers; Dophkah was in 
 the Wady Seih, a day’s journey from the 
 Wady Nasb; traces of the ancient name were 
 found by Seetzen at a place called El Tabbacha 
 in a rocky pass, El] Kineh, where Egyptian 
 antiquities still remain, indicating the ancient 
 route. ‘The wilderness of Sin properly speak- 
 ing ends here, the sandstone ceases, and is re- 
 placed by the porphyry. and granite which 
 belong to the central formation of the Sinaitic 
 group. Alush lay on the way towards Re- 
 phidim; the identification with Ash is doubt- 
 ful, the distance from Horeb exceeding a day’s 
 march. Alush may have been near the entrance 
 to the Wady Sheich. 
 
 Rephidim| On the identification of Re- ' 
 
 phidim see note at the end of this book. 
 
 2. tempt the Lorn] It is a general cha- 
 racteristic of the Israelites that the miracles, 
 which met each need asit arose, failed to pro- 
 duce a habit of faith: but the severity of the 
 trial, the faintness and anguish of thirst in 
 the burning desert, must not be overlooked in 
 appreciating their conduct. ‘I thirst” was 
 the only expression of bodily suffering wrung 
 from our Lord on the Cross. 
 
 4. they be almost ready to stone me] Lit. 
 yet a little and they will stone me. 
 The Authorised Version gives the meaning, 
 
 EXO. DUS ex aah 
 
 [v. 1—7. 
 
 of Egypt, to kill us and our children 
 and our cattle with thirst? 
 
 4 And Moses cried unto the Lorn, 
 saying, What shall I do unto this 
 people? they be almost ready to stone 
 me. 
 
 5 And the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 Go on before the people, and take 
 with thee of the elders of Israel; and 
 
 thy rod, wherewith ’thou smotest the @ chap. 7. 
 oO. 
 
 river, Ales in thine hand, and go. 
 
 6 ’ Behold, I will send before thee ¢ Numb. 
 there upon fhe rock in Horeb; and },,7",s, 
 
 thou shalt smite the rock, and there ae 
 
 shall come water out of it, that the Wisd. 11. 
 people may drink. And Moses did Scone 
 
 so in the sight of the elders of + 
 Israel. 
 
 7 And he called the name of the "That is, 
 
 Tentation, 
 place ' Massah, and ' Meribah, because i That is, 
 of the chiding of the children of Israel, pais 
 
 but not the liveliness and force of the He- 
 brew. 
 
 6. the rock in Horeb] The name Horeb 
 signifies ‘‘dry, parched,” and evidently points 
 to a distinct miracle. At what point Moses 
 struck the rock cannot be determined; but it 
 would seem to have been in the presence of 
 the Elders as selected witnesses, not in the 
 sight of the people, and therefore not near the 
 summit. 
 
 It is questioned whether the water thus 
 supplied ceased with the immediate occasion. 
 St Paul calls it ‘‘a spiritual drink,” and adds, 
 ‘‘that all the Israelites drank of the spiritual 
 rock which followed them, and that rock was 
 Christ.” x Cor. x. 4. The interpretation of 
 that passage belongs to the New ‘Testament: 
 but the general meaning appears to be that 
 their wants were ever supplied from Him, of 
 whom the rock was but a symbol, and who 
 accompanied them in all their wanderings. 
 ‘Two traditions of the Rabbins are notice- 
 able: one, that the rock thus smitten actually 
 followed the Israelites, another, that the stream 
 of water went with them. ‘There is no justi- 
 fication for these fables in the sacred narrative. 
 The repetition of the miracle (see Numbers 
 xx. 11) excludes the second, the first needs no 
 refutation. 
 
 7. Massah| The word is derived from that 
 which is used by Moses, v. 2. Meribah, as 
 is stated in the margin, means “ chiding,” 
 referring also to v. 2. The names were re- 
 tained from that time, nor are Rephidim and 
 Kadesh mentioned by later writers: they 
 belong to the time of Moses. On the im- 
 
vy. 8—13.] 
 
 and because they tempted the Lorn, 
 saying, Is the Lorp among us, or not? 
 
 _ 8 4 ¢Then came Amalek, and 
 Wisd. rz, fought with Israel in Rephidim. 
 Called g And Moses said unto ¢ Joshua, 
 Jesus, 
 
 Acts 7. 45. 
 
 Choose us out men, and go out, fight 
 with Amalek: to morrow I will stand 
 on the top of the hill with the rod of 
 God in mine hand. 
 
 10 So Joshua did as Moses had said 
 to him, and fought with Amalek: and 
 Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to 
 the top of the hill. 
 
 11 And it came to pass, when Mo- 
 
 portance of this lesson see our Lord’s words, 
 Matt. iv. 7. 
 
 8. Then came Amalek| The attack upon 
 the Israelites was made under circumstances, 
 at a time and place, fully explained by what 
 is known of the Peninsula. It occurred about 
 two months after the Exodus, towards the 
 end of May or early in June, when the Be- 
 douins leave the lower plains in order to find 
 pasture for their flocks on the cooler heights. 
 ‘The approach of the Israelites to Sinai would 
 of course attract notice, and no cause of war- 
 fare is more common than a dispute for the 
 right of pasturage. ‘The Amalekites were at 
 that time the most powerful race in the Pen- 
 insula, which from the earliest ages was 
 peopled by fierce and warlike tribes, with 
 whom the Pharaohs, from the third dynasty 
 downwards, were engaged in constant struggles. 
 It may be conjectured that reports of the 
 marvellous supply of water may have reached 
 the natives and accelerated their movements. 
 On this occasion Amalek took the position, 
 recognized in the Sacred History, as the chief 
 of the heathens, Num. xxiv. 20; the first 
 among the heathens who attacked God’s peo- 
 ple, and as such marked out for punishment, 
 see 1 Sam. xv. 2, especially merited by them as 
 descendants of the elder brother of Jacob, 
 and therefore near kinsmen of the Israelites. 
 
 9. Joshua| This is the first mention of the 
 great follower and successor of Moses. He 
 died at the age of 110, some 65 years after this 
 transaction. His original name was Hosea, 
 but Moses calls him by the full name, which 
 was first given about forty years afterwards, 
 as that by which he was to be known to 
 succeeding generations. From this it may 
 perhaps be inferred that this portion of Ex- 
 odus was written, or revised, towards the end 
 of the sojourn in the wilderness. A later 
 writer, mindful of the change of name, would 
 probably have avoided the appearance of an 
 anachronism. 
 
 the rod of God] By using the same rod 
 
 1a 9, CORUM ORO PEDD, aie 
 
 ses held up his hand, that Israel pre- 
 vailed: and when he let down his 
 hand, Amalek prevailed. 
 
 12 But Moses’ hands were heavy ; 
 and they took a stone, and put zt un- 
 der him, and he sat thereon; and 
 Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, 
 the one on the one side, and the other 
 on the other side; and his hands were 
 steady until the going down of the 
 sun. 
 
 13 And Joshua discomfited Amalek 
 and his people with the edge of the 
 sword. 
 
 Moses gave the people an unmistakeable and 
 much needed proof that victory over hu- 
 man enemies was to be attributed altogether 
 to the divine power which had delivered them 
 from Egypt, and saved them from _perishing 
 in the wilderness, ‘The hill, on which Moses 
 stood during the combat, Knobel supposed 
 to be the height now called Feria on the north 
 side of the plain Er Rahah; on its top isa 
 level tract with good pasturage and planta- 
 tions. The conjecture may shew the vivid 
 impression of reality made by the narrative 
 upon a critic who believes this very portion to 
 be the product of a later age. 
 
 10. Hur| Hur is mentioned in one other 
 passage in connection with Aaron, ch. xxiv. 14. 
 He was grandfather of Bezaleel, the great 
 sculptor and artificer of the tabernacle, see 
 ch, xxxl. 2—5, and belonged to the tribe of 
 Judah. From the book of Chronicles we 
 learn that the name of his father was Caleb, 
 of his mother, Ephrath. ‘That he was a 
 person of high station and of advanced years 
 is evident, but the traditions that he was the 
 husband of Miriam (Josephus), or her son by 
 
 Caleb (Jarchi), would seem to be mere con- 
 
 jecture; such a connection would scarcely 
 have been unnoticed in the account of Bezaleel. 
 
 11. The act represents the efficacy of in- 
 tercessory prayer—offered doubtless by Moses 
 —a point of great moment to the Israelites 
 at that time and to the Church in all ages. 
 ‘This interpretation would seem too obvious to 
 insist upon, but it has been contested by Kurtz, 
 who regards the lifting of Moses’ hands as the 
 attitude of a general directing the battle. 
 
 12. until the going down of the sun] ‘The 
 length of this first great battle indicates the 
 strength and obstinacy of the assailants. It 
 was no mere raid of Bedouins, but a delibe- 
 rate attack of the Amalekites, who, as we 
 have seen, were thoroughly trained in warfare. 
 by their struggles with Egypt. 
 
 13. with the edge of the sword] ‘This 
 xX 2 
 
324 
 
 14 And the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 Write this for a memorial in a book, 
 and rehearse zt in the ears of Joshua: 
 
 7Numb. for /I will utterly put out the re- 
 7 Sam. 15. Membrance of Amalek from under 
 
 3- 
 
 heaven. 
 15 And Moses built an altar, and 
 
 expression always denotes a great slaughter of 
 the enemy. 
 
 14. in a book] It should be rendered in 
 the book. ‘The plain and obvious meaning 
 is that the account of this battle, and of the 
 command to destroy the Amalekites, was to 
 be recorded in the book which contained the 
 history of God’s dealings with His people. 
 In this explanation nearly all critics are agreed. 
 See Introduction to the Pentateuch, p. 1, and 
 note below. Moses was further instructed to 
 impress the command specially on the mind of 
 Joshua, as the leader to whom the first step 
 towards its accomplishment would be entrusted 
 on the conquest of Canaan. ‘The work was 
 not actually completed until the reign of Heze- 
 kiah, when 500 of the tribe of Simeon ‘‘smote 
 the rest of the Amalekites that were escaped” 
 and retained possession of Mount Seir, when 
 the book of Chronicles was written, 1 Chron. 
 iv. 43. This is a point to be especially noticed. 
 ‘True prophecy deals often with the remote 
 future, regardless of delays in its fulfilment; 
 but certainly no one writing at a later time, 
 while the Amalekites still existed as a nation, 
 would have invented the prediction. 
 
 15. Sehovah-nissi|] i.e. as in the margin, 
 ‘¢ Jehovah my banner.” As a proper name the 
 Hebrew word is rightly preserved. ‘The mean- 
 ing is evidently that the name of Jehovah is 
 the true banner under which victory is certain ; 
 so to speak, the motto or inscription on the 
 banners of the host. Inscriptions on the royal 
 standard were well known. Each of the Pha- 
 raohs on his accession adopted one in addition 
 to his official name. 
 
 16. Because the Lorp hath sworn| This 
 rendering is incorrect, but the Hebrew is 
 
 NOTE 
 
 Rosenmiiller expresses himself without any 
 doubt. In his note on the passage he says 
 ‘‘ Memoriale in libro quem scribere incepisti:” 
 and in the Prolegg. p. 5, ‘‘ Moses dicit se divino 
 jussu (insidias) inscripsisse libro, incoepto haud 
 dubie, et in quo jam plura exaraverat, quod 
 cum articulo 1DD3 (non IBD3) scripsit, quo in- 
 nuit se de certo quodam et satis noto libro 
 loqui.” ‘Thus Keil, ‘‘the book appointed for 
 the record of the glorious works of God;” and 
 
 EXODUS. VIS [v. 14—16- 
 
 called the name of it ! Jehovah- Ha 
 
 Nissi : my banner, 
 16 For he said, ' Because ' the Lorp 10r, 
 hath sworn that the Lorp will have tie hand 
 war with Amalek from generation to Ocal 
 the throne 
 
 generation. of the Ol 
 Lorb, therefore, &°c. tHeb, the hand upon the throne of the LORD. 
 
 obscure and the true meaning is very doubt- 
 ful. As the Hebrew text now stands the 
 literal interpretation is ‘‘for hand on throne 
 of Jah,” which may mean, as our margin 
 and as Clericus and Rosenmiiller explain it, 
 ‘*because his hand (z.e. the hand of Amalek) 
 is against the throne of God, therefore the 
 Lord hath war with Amalek from generation 
 to generation;” and this on the whole, seems 
 to be the most satisfactory explanation. It 
 expresses a certain fact, and keeps most closely 
 to the Hebrew. ‘The word rendered ‘‘throne”’ 
 occurs in the exact form in no other passage, 
 but it may be an archaic form of the very 
 common word from which it differs but 
 slightly (p> for D3), and which is found in 
 the Samaritan. Our translators follow the 
 general sense given by the Targum of Onkelos 
 and Saadia, who agree in regarding the ex- 
 pression as a solemn asseveration by the throne 
 of God. ‘To this however the objections are 
 insuperable; it has no parallel in Scriptural 
 usage: God swears by Himself, not by His 
 Throne. 
 
 An alteration, slight in form, but consider- 
 able in meaning, has been proposed with much 
 confidence, viz. ‘‘ Nes,” standard for ‘‘ Kes,” 
 throne; thus connecting the name of the altar 
 with the sentence. But conjectural emenda- 
 tions are not to be adopted without necessity, 
 and the obvious a priori probability of such a 
 reading makes it improbable that one so far 
 more difficult should have been substituted for 
 it. One of the surest canons of criticism mili- 
 tates against its reception. ‘The text as it 
 stands was undoubtedly that which was alone 
 known to the Targumists, the Samaritan, the 
 Syriac, the Latin and the Arabic translators. 
 The LXX. appear to have had a different 
 reading, év yespt kpupaia moNepel- 
 
 on v. 14. 
 
 Kalisch, who renders it ‘‘the book:” he quotes 
 Aben-Ezra to prove that a particular book 
 was referred to, and compares other passages 
 (Exod, xxiv. 4, 7, XxXxiv. 27; Num. xxxiil. 1, 2, 
 XXXxvi. 13; Deut. xxviil. 61). Knobel however 
 proposes a different interpretation, taking ‘‘in 
 the book” to mean simply, ‘‘in writing.” He 
 refers to Num. v.23; 1S. x. 253 Jer. Xxxil. 10; 
 and Job xix. 23: which prove that this 
 expression might mean ‘‘a book” generally, 
 
or.) EXODUS. XVIII. 
 
 provided no particular book were already in 
 existence. It is not however by any means 
 equivalent to our expression ‘“‘in writing,” 
 which would be a strange tautology ‘‘ write in 
 writing,” but in each case a book or schedule 
 is meant: whether a book already begun, or 
 then to be begun, is a question to be deter- 
 mined by the context. ‘The argument for the 
 positive existence of ‘‘a book” is not mate- 
 rially affected by the proposed change: but 
 all probability is in favour of the natural and 
 obvious impression that Moses was command- 
 ed to record this particular transaction in ‘‘the 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 1 Fethro bringeth to Moses his wife and two 
 sons. 7 Moses entertaineth him. 13 Fe- 
 thre’s counsel is accepted. 24 Fethro departeth. 
 
 oP: 2. HEN “Jethro, the priest of 
 Midian, Moses’ father in law, 
 heard of all that God had done for 
 Moses, and for Israel his people, and 
 that the Lorp had brought Israel out 
 
 of Egypt; 
 
 2 TVhen Jethro, Moses’ father in 
 law, took Zipporah, Moses’ wife, after 
 he had sent her back, 
 
 3 And her two sons; of which the 
 
 échap. 2. 2name of the one was 'Gershom; for 
 I That is, he said, I have been an alien in a 
 
 4ipersstrange land: 
 
 book” which related the history of God’s 
 dealings with His people. ‘The evidence for 
 the existence of books of considerable extent is 
 stated in the Introduction to the Pentateuch. 
 To this it may be added that under the ancient 
 Empire, functionaries of the highest rank held 
 the office of governor of the Palace and of the 
 ‘‘house of manuscripts;” see De Rougé, 
 ‘Recherches,’ pp. 73, 85. ‘The tutelary Deity 
 of writing was called Saph or Sapheh (a 
 name apparently connected with the Hebrew 
 ‘*sepher’’): a Pharaoh of the 5th Dynasty bears 
 the style ‘‘ beloved of Saph.” l.c. p. 84. 
 
 5 And Jethro, Moses’ father in law, 
 came with his sons and his wife unto 
 Moses into the wilderness, where he 
 encamped at the mount of God: 
 
 6 And he said unto Moses, I thy 
 father in law Jethro am come unto 
 thee, and thy wife, and her two sons 
 with her. 
 
 7 4 And Moses went out to meet . 
 his father in law, and did obeisance, 
 and kissed him; and they asked each 
 other of their welfare; and they came t Heb. 
 into the tent. : ee 
 
 8 And Moses told his father in law 
 all that the Lorp had done unto 
 Pharaoh and to the Egyptians for 
 Israel’s sake, and all the travail that 
 
 325 
 
 4 And the name of the other was had come upon them by the way, and t Heb. 
 
 tes ie 'Bliezer; for the God of my father, how the Lorp delivered them. te 
 
 an help. said he, was mine help, and delivered 
 me from the sword of Pharaoh: 
 
 CHAP. XVIII. The events recorded in this 
 chapter could not have occupied many days, 
 fifteen only elapsed between the arrival of the 
 Israelites in the wilderness of Sin and their 
 final arrival at Sinai, see ch. xvi. 1, and xix. 1. 
 ‘This leaves however sufficient time for the in- 
 terview and transactions between Moses and 
 Jethro. 
 
 1. Jethro] See note on ch. ii. 18. For ‘‘father 
 in law” the Vulgate has cognatus, an indefi- 
 nite expression. Jethro was in all probability 
 the ‘‘brother in law” of Moses. On the 
 parting from Zipporah, see note on ch. iv. 26. 
 
 This chapter, which abounds in personal 
 reminiscences (and gives a vivid impression of the 
 affectionate and confiding character of Moses), 
 stands rather apart from the general narrative. 
 It may have been and probably was written on 
 a separate roll. ‘The repetition of particulars 
 well known to the reader is a general charac- 
 teristic of such distinct portions. 
 
 g And Jethro rejoiced for all the 
 goodness which the Lorp had done 
 
 5. into the wilderness] i.e. according to 
 the view which seems on the whole most 
 probable, on the plain near the northern sum- 
 mit of Horeb, the mount of God. It is 
 described by Robinson, I. p. 88, as a naked 
 desert,—wild and desolate. The exact spe- 
 cification of the locality may indicate a pre- 
 vious engagement between Moses and Jethro 
 to meet at this place. The valley which 
 opens upon Er Rahah on the left of Horeb 
 is called by the Arabs Wady Shueib, z.¢. the 
 vale of Hobab. 
 
 6. The LXX. read, ‘And it was told to 
 Moses, saying, Lo, thy father in law Jether 
 is come.” ‘This suits the context, and is 
 probably the true reading. 
 
 7. did obeisance| As to an elder, the priest, 
 if not the chief, of a great tribe. 
 
 asked each other of their welfare| Or, 
 addressed each other with the customary salu- 
 tation, ‘‘Peace be unto you.” 
 
¢ chap. 1. 
 TO,\ 10,122. 
 > 
 
 <5: 7- 
 & 14. 18. 
 
 to Israel, whom he had delivered out 
 of the hand of the Egyptians. 
 
 10 And Jethro said, Blessed be the 
 Lorp, who hath delivered you out 
 of the hand of the Egyptians, and out 
 of the hand of Pharaoh, who hath de- 
 livered the people from under the hand 
 of the Egyptians. ’ 
 
 11 Now I know that the Lorp zs 
 
 - greater than all gods: “for in the thing 
 wherein they dealt proudly be was 
 above them. 
 
 12 And Jethro, Moses’ father in 
 law, took a burnt offering and sacrifices 
 for God: and Aaron came, and all 
 the elders of Israel, to eat bread with 
 Moses’ father in law before God. 
 
 13 4 And it came to pass on the 
 
 11. greater than all gods| ‘This does not 
 prove that Jethro recognized the existence 
 or power of other Deities, for the expression 
 is not uncommon in the mouth of Hebrew 
 monotheists, and corresponds exactly to the 
 terms in which Moses had himself celebrated 
 the overthrow of the Egyptians; see note on 
 ch. xv. 11. It simply indicates a conviction of 
 the incomparable might and majesty of Jeho- 
 vah. 
 
 for in.. above them] Lit. For (this is shewn) 
 in the matter wherein they dealt 
 proudly against them. ‘The construction 
 depends upon the previous clause; the meaning 
 is, for I know the greatness of Jehovah by the 
 very transaction wherein the Egyptians dealt 
 haughtily and cruelly against the Israelites. 
 Jethro refers especially to the destruction of 
 the Egyptian host in the Red Sea, and very 
 probably to the words in which Moses him- 
 self had celebrated that event; see ch. xv. 11. 
 
 12. a burnt offering and sacrifices| ‘This 
 verse clearly shews that Jethro was recognized 
 as a priest of the true God. ‘The identity of 
 religious faith could not be more conclusively 
 proved than by the participation in the sacri- 
 ficial feast. ‘This passage is of great import- 
 ance in its bearings upon the relation between 
 the Israelites and their congeners, and upon 
 the state of religion among the descendants of 
 Abraham. 
 
 13. In the following passage the change 
 in the organization of the people, by which 
 the burden of judicial proceedings was trans- 
 ferred in great part from Moses to subordinate 
 officers, is attributed entirely to the counsel of 
 Jethro. ‘This is important for several reasons. 
 It is certain that no late writer would have in- 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 AaVyeE GIS 
 
 morrow, that Moses sat to judge the 
 people: and the people stood by 
 Moses from the morning unto the 
 evening. 
 
 14 And when Moses’ father in law 
 saw all that he did to the people, he 
 said, What zs this thing that thou 
 doest to the people? why sittest thou 
 thyself alone, and all the people stand 
 by thee from morning unto even? 
 
 15 And Moses said unto his father 
 in law, Because the people come unto 
 me to inquire of God: 
 
 16 When they have a matter, they 
 come unto me; and I judge between 
 
 [v. to—16,. 
 
 fone and another, and I do make tHeb. 
 @ Mian 
 and his 
 JSellow. 
 
 them know the statutes of God, and 
 his laws. 
 
 vented such a story, and most improbable that 
 tradition would have long preserved the me- 
 mory of a transaction which to Israelites might 
 naturally seem derogatory to their legislator. 
 Nothing however can be more characteristic 
 of Moses, who combines on all occasions 
 distrust of himself, and singular openness to 
 impressions, with the wisdom and sound 
 judgment which chooses the best course when 
 pointed out. It is remarkable that an institu- 
 tion so novel and important should have pre- 
 ceded the promulgation of the Sinaitic law. 
 
 Srom the morning unto the evening] It may 
 be assumed as at least probable that numerous 
 cases of difficulty arose out of the division of 
 the spoil of the Amalekites: this was more- 
 over the first station at which the Israelites 
 appear to have rested long after their departure 
 from Elim, and causes would of course ac- 
 cumulate during the journey. 
 
 15. to inquire of God) ‘The decisions of 
 Moses were doubtless accepted by the people 
 as oracles. ‘There is no reason to suppose 
 that he consulted, or that the people expected 
 him to consult, the Lord by Urim and Thum- 
 mim, which are first mentioned xxvili. 30, 
 where see note. ‘The internal prompting of 
 the Spirit was a sufficient guidance for him, 
 and a sufficient authority for the people. 
 
 16. the statutes of God, and his laws} 
 This would seem to imply that in deciding 
 each particular case Moses explained the prin- 
 ciples of right and justice on which his 
 decision rested. It became, so to speak, a 
 precedent; he can scarcely be supposed to 
 refer to any existing code, the necessity for 
 which must, however, have soon become appa- 
 rent, preparing the people for the legislation 
 given within a few. days at Sinai. 
 
Vv. 17—27.| 
 
 17 And Moses’ father in law said 
 unto him, The thing that thou doest 
 is not good. 
 
 18 ‘Thou wilt surely wear away, 
 both thou, and this people that zs with 
 thee: for this thing zs too heavy for 
 thee; ?thou art not able to perform it 
 thyself alone. 
 
 _ 19 Hearken now unto my voice, I 
 will give thee counsel, and God shall 
 be with thee: Be thou for the people 
 to God-ward, that thou mayest bring 
 the causes unto God: 
 
 20 And thou shalt teach them 
 ordinances and laws, and shalt shew 
 them the way wherein they must walk, 
 and the work that they must do. 
 
 21 Moreover thou shalt provide out 
 of all the people able men, such as 
 fear God, men of truth, hating covet- 
 ousness; and place such over them, 
 to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of 
 hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers 
 of tens: 
 
 22, And let them judge the people 
 
 EXODUS XVELI, 
 
 > 
 
 at all seasons: and it shall be, that 
 every great matter they shall bring 
 unto thee, but every small matter they 
 shall judge: so shall it be easier for 
 thyself, and they shall bear the burden 
 with thee. 
 
 23 If thou shalt do this thing, and 
 God command thee so, then thou shalt 
 be able to endure, and all this people 
 shall also go to their place in peace. 
 
 24 So Moses hearkened to the voice 
 of his father in law, and did all that 
 he had said. 
 
 25 And Moses chose able men out 
 of all Israel, and made them heads 
 over the people, rulers of thousands, 
 rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, 
 and rulers of tens. 
 
 26 And they judged the people at 
 all seasons: the hard causes they 
 brought unto Moses, but every small 
 matter they judged themselves. 
 
 27 4 And Moses let his father in 
 law depart; and he went his way into 
 his own land. 
 
 18. Thou wilt surely wear away| This 
 expresses the true sense: the Hebrew word 
 implies decay and exhaustion. 
 
 19. counsel] In this counsel Jethro draws 
 a distinction, probably not previously recog- 
 nized, between the functions of the legislator 
 and the judge. Moses as legislator stands be- 
 tween the people and God. He brings the 
 cause to God, and learns from Him the prin- 
 ciple by which it is to be determined: and in 
 the next place, sets before the people the whole 
 system of ordinances and laws by which they 
 are to be henceforth guided. As judge Moses 
 decides all difficult cases in the last resort, 
 leaving questions of detail to officers chosen 
 by himself from the people. 
 
 to God-ward] lit. ‘before God,” standing 
 between them and God, both as His minister, 
 or representative: and also as the representa- 
 tive of the people, their agent, so to speak, or 
 deputy before God. 
 
 20. teach them] The Hebrew word is 
 emphatic, and signifies ‘‘enlightenment.” ‘The 
 text gives four distinct points, (a) the ‘‘ordi- 
 nances,” or specific enactments, (4) ‘‘the laws,” 
 or general regulations, (c) ‘‘the way,” the general 
 course of duty, (d) ‘‘the work,” each spe- 
 cific act. 
 
 21. able men| This gives the true force 
 of the Hebrew, literally ‘‘men of might;” 
 i.e. strength of character and ability. The 
 
 qualifications are remarkably complete, ability, 
 piety, truthfulness and unselfishness. ‘The re- 
 commendation leaves no doubt as to the faith 
 of Jethro, though, with the usual care observed 
 by Moses in relating the words of pious Gen- 
 tiles, he is represented as using the general ex- 
 pression God, not the revealed name Jehovah. 
 From Deut. i. 13, it appears that Moses left 
 the selection of the persons to the people, an 
 example followed by the Apostles; see Acts 
 Vi, 3. 
 
 rulers of thousands, &c.|'This minute classi- 
 fication of the people is thoroughly in accord- 
 ance with the Semitic character, and was 
 retained in after ages. ‘The numbers appear to 
 be conventional, corresponding nearly, but not 
 exactly, to the military, or civil divisions of 
 the people. The number ‘‘ten” denotes in 
 Arabic, and may have denoted in Hebrew, 
 a family; the largest division rooo is used as 
 an equivalent of a gens under one head, Num. 
 17-16,x.)45 Josh; xxi. 24- 
 
 The word ‘rulers,” sometimes rendered 
 ‘‘princes,” is general, including all ranks of 
 officials placed in command. ‘The same word 
 is used regularly on Egyptian monuments of 
 the time of Moses: see note on ch. i. 11. 
 
 23. to their place] i.e. to Canaan, which 
 is thus recognized by Jethro as the appointed 
 and true home of Israel. 
 
 27. into his own land} Midian, ‘This 
 
 to 
 
(24 
 
 3 
 
 Acts 7, 
 8. 
 
 8 Fy Gh Ud, 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 1 The people come to Sinat. 3 God’s message 
 by Moses unto the people out of the mount. 
 8 The people's answer returned again. 10 
 Lhe people are prepared against the third day. 
 12 Zhe mountain must not be touched. 16 
 The fearful presence of God upon the mount. 
 
 N the third month, when the 
 
 children of Israel were gone forth 
 
 out of the land of Egypt, the same 
 
 day came they into the wilderness of 
 Sinai. 
 
 2 For they were departed from 
 Rephidim, and were come ¢o the desert 
 of Sinai, and had pitched in the wil- 
 derness; and there Israel camped _be- 
 fore the mount. 
 
 3 And *Moses went up unto God, 
 
 [v. 1—6, 
 
 and the Lorp called unto him out of 
 the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou 
 say to the house of Jacob, and tell the 
 children of Israel; 
 
 4 °Ye have seen what I did unto ? Deut. a9, 
 
 the Egyptians, and how I bare you on ~ 
 
 eagles’ wings, and brought you unto 
 myself. 
 
 5 Now ‘therefore, if ye will obey < Deut s. 
 
 my voice indeed, and keep my cove-: 
 nant, then ye shall be a peculiar trea- 
 
 sure unto me above all people: for all ¢Deut. ro, 
 
 the earth zs mine: 
 
 14. 
 Psal. 24. 1. 
 
 6 And ye shall be unto mea “king- <: Pet. 2 
 dom of priests, and an holy nation. Rev. 1.6. 
 
 ‘These are the words which thou shalt 
 speak unto the children of Israel. 
 
 expression is favourable to the view that the 
 home of Midian was on the east of the Red 
 Sea, and not in the Peninsula of Sinai. If the 
 identity of Jethro with Hobab be assumed, he 
 must have returned and met Moses once more 
 after the departure from Sinai. See Numbers 
 X. 29-32. It seems however far more proba- 
 ble that Hobab was his brother. See note on 
 chit, 
 
 Cuap. XIX. 1. In the third month| This 
 expression does not determine the exact day: 
 the word ‘‘month” is not found in the Pen- 
 tateuch in the sense of new moon, or the 
 first day of the month, which has been at- 
 tributed to it in this passage by many eminent 
 critics. Still the natural impression made by 
 this statement is that the arrival of the Israel- 
 ites coincided with the beginning of the third 
 month. 
 
 the wilderness of Sinai] See note at the end 
 of the book. 
 
 3. Moses went up unto God] This seems 
 to imply that the voice was heard by Moses 
 as he was ascending the mount. 
 
 house of Jacob] This expression does not 
 occur elsewhere in the Pentateuch. It has a 
 peculiar fitness here, referring doubtless to the 
 special promises made to the Patriarch. 
 
 4. on eagles’ wings] Bochart, after quoting 
 passages from lian, Appian and other 
 writers, observes that Moses gives a perfect 
 explanation of the simile in Deuteronomy 
 XXxll. 11. He adds ‘‘It is to be observed that 
 both in the law and in the gospel the Church 
 is compared to fledgelings which the mother 
 cherishes and protects under her wings: but 
 in the law that mother is an eagle, in the 
 gospel a hen; thus shadowing forth the di- 
 versity of administration under each Cove- 
 nant; the one of power, which God manifest- 
 
 ed when He brought His people out of Egypt 
 with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, 
 and led them into the promised land; the 
 Other of grace, when Christ came in humility 
 and took the form of a servant and became 
 obedient unto death, even the death of the 
 Cross.” Bochart however, remarks, that the 
 simile of an eagle is applied to Christ when 
 He vindicates His people from the Dragon, 
 Rev. xii. 14. See Hierozoicon, lib, 11. ch. 22, 
 § 3 and 4. 
 
 5. a peculiar treasure} ‘This expresses 
 the true sense of the Hebrew word, which 
 designates a costly possession acquired with 
 exertion, and carefully guarded. ‘The peculiar 
 relation in which Israel stands, taken out of 
 the Heathen world and consecrated to God, 
 as his slaves, subjects, and children, determines 
 their privileges, and is the foundation of their 
 duties. ‘The same principle applies even in 
 a stronger sense to the Church. See Acts 
 xx. 28; x Cor. vi. 20; 1 Petoige 
 
 all the earth is mine| This is added, as we 
 may believe, to impress upon the Jews that 
 their God was no mere national Deity, a point 
 of great practical importance. 
 
 6. a kingdom of priests} ‘The exact 
 meaning of this expression, as it was under- 
 stood by all the ancient translators, and as it 
 is explained in the New Testament, is that 
 Israel collectively is a royal and priestly race: 
 a dynasty of priests, each true member uniting 
 in himself the attributes of a king and priest. 
 The word ‘‘kingdom” is not taken in the 
 modern sense, as a collective name for the 
 subjects of a king, but in the old Hebrew sense 
 of ‘‘royalty,” or ‘‘dynasty.” ‘Thus nearly all 
 ancient and modern commentators explain the 
 words. (The LXX. Baoi\etov ieparevpa, Tar- 
 gum Onk. kings and priests; Jonathan, crown- 
 ed kings and ministering priests.) 
 
‘chap. 24. 
 
 3, 7+ 
 Deut. 5. 
 27, 
 
 & 26, 17. 
 
 v. 7—16. | 
 
 7 ™ And Moses came and called 
 for the elders of the people, and laid 
 before their faces all these words 
 which the Lorp commanded him. 
 
 8 And “all the people answered 
 together, and said, All that the Lorp 
 hath spoken we will do. And Moses 
 returned the words of the people unto 
 the Lorp. 
 
 g And the Lorn said unto Moses, 
 Lo, I come unto thee in a thick 
 cloud, that the people may hear when 
 I speak with thee, and believe thee 
 for ever. And Moses told the words 
 of the people unto the Lorn. 
 
 10 { And the Lorn said unto Mo- 
 ses, Go unto the people, and sanctify 
 them to day and to morrow, and let 
 them wash their clothes, 
 
 r1 And be ready against the third 
 day: for the third day the Lorp will 
 come down in the sight of all the 
 people upon mount Sinai. 
 
 12 And thou shalt set bounds un- 
 to the people round about, saying, 
 
 EXODUS. XIX. 
 
 Take heed to yourselves, that ye go 
 
 not up into the mount, or touch the 
 
 border of it: & whosoever toucheth * Heb. 12, 
 0. 
 
 the mount shall be surely put to 
 death : 
 
 13 There shall not an hand touch 
 it, but he shall surely be stoned, or 
 shot through; whether zt de beast or 
 man, it shall not live: when the 
 'trumpet soundeth long, they shall ! or, 
 come up to the mount. 
 
 14 “1 And Moses went down from 
 the mount unto the people, and sanc- 
 tified the people; and they washed 
 their clothes. 
 
 15 And he said unto the people, 
 Be ready against the third day: come 
 not at your wives. 
 
 t6 4 And it came to pass on the 
 third day in the morning, that there 
 were thunders and lightnings, and a 
 thick cloud upon the mount, and the 
 voice of the trumpet exceeding loud; 
 so that all the people that was in the 
 camp trembled. 
 
 an holy nation| ‘The holiness of Israel con- 
 sisted in its special consecration to God: it 
 was a sacred nation, sacred by adoption, by 
 covenant, and by participation in all means of 
 grace. ‘The radical meaning of the Hebrew 
 ‘¢K hodesh” appears to be ‘‘pure, clean, clear 
 from all pollution bodily or spiritual,” rather 
 than, as many critics have assumed, ‘‘sepa- 
 rate and set apart.” ‘The distinction between 
 official consecration, and internal holiness is 
 secondary, and scarcely seems to have lain 
 within the scope of the Hebrew mind: the 
 ideas were inseparable. 
 
 8. All that the Lorp, &c.| By this answer 
 the people accepted the covenant. It was the 
 preliminary condition of their complete admis- 
 sion into the state of a royal priesthood. 
 
 9. in a thick cloud| Or ‘‘in the darkness 
 of cloud,” i.e. in the midst of the dense cloud 
 which indicated the Presence of Jehovah. ‘The 
 people were to hear the voice of God, dis- 
 tinctly announcing the fundamental principles 
 of the eternal law. 
 
 10. sanctify them] ‘The injunction in- 
 volves bodily purification and undoubtedly 
 also spiritual preparation. ‘Thus Heb. x. 22, 
 ‘sour hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, 
 and our bodies washed with pure water.” ‘The 
 washing of the clothes was an outward symbol 
 well understood in all nations. The supply 
 
 of water in the region about Sinai is repeatedly 
 stated by Burckhardt and other travellers to 
 be abundant. In Deut. ix. 21, we read of the 
 brook descending from the mount. 
 
 11. the third day|'The significance of the 
 expression ‘‘third day” scarcely needs to be 
 pointed out; whether this third day fell on 
 the Jewish or Christian Sabbath is quite un- 
 certain; but it can scarcely have corresponded 
 to the day of Pentecost, as Bp. Wordsworth 
 holds on the authority of an ancient and 
 widely accredited tradition: more than 60 days 
 had elapsed since the Passover, See the article 
 on Pentecost in Smith’s ‘ Dict.’ 
 
 12. set bounds unto the people| ‘The access 
 to the base of the mountain is evidently shewn 
 to have been otherwise unimpeded. Dr Stan- 
 ley speaks of the low line of alluvial mounds 
 at the foot of the cliff of Ras Safsafeh as 
 exactly answering to the bounds which were 
 to keep the people off from touching the mount: 
 but the bounds here spoken of were to be set 
 up by Moses, 
 
 13. touch it] Rather ‘touch him.” The 
 person was not to be touched, since the contact 
 would be pollution. He was to be stoned or 
 shot with an arrow; or probably with a jave- 
 lin, as was customary in later times. 
 
 when the trumpet, &c.] When the trumpet 
 sounded those who were specially called might 
 ascend, ; 
 
 329 
 
 cornet, 
 
Os 
 
 ’ Deut. 4. 
 
 it. 
 
 t Heb. 
 
 contest. 
 
 17 And Moses brought forth the 
 people out of the camp to meet with 
 God; and they stood at the nether 
 part of the mount. 
 
 18 And * mount Sinai was altoge- 
 ther on a smoke, because the Lorp 
 descended upon it in fire: and the 
 smoke thereof ascended as the smoke 
 of a furnace, and the whole mount 
 quaked greatly. 
 
 1g And when the voice of the 
 trumpet sounded long, and waxed 
 louder and louder, Moses spake, and 
 God answered him by a voice. 
 
 20 And the Lorp came down up- 
 on mount Sinai, on the top of the 
 mount: and the Lorp called Moses 
 up to the top of the mount; and Mo- 
 ses went up. 
 
 21 And the Lorp said unto Mo- 
 ses, Go down, ' charge the people, lest 
 they break through unto the Lorp to 
 gaze, and many of them perish. 
 
 22 And let the priests also, which 
 come near to the Lorp, sanctify 
 
 17. out of the camp| The encampment 
 must have extended far and wide over the 
 plain in front of the mountain. From one 
 entrance of the plain to the other there is 
 space for the whole host of the Israelites. ‘This 
 is a point which has been determined by accu- 
 rate measurement of the valley. See note at 
 the end of Exodus. 
 
 18. @ furnace] The word is Egyptian, 
 and occurs only in the Pentateuch. 
 
 22. the priests also| ‘The Levitical priest- 
 hood was not yet instituted, but sacrifices 
 had hitherto been offered by persons who 
 were recognized as having the right or autho- 
 rity: according to the very probable account 
 of Rabbinical writers these were the first- 
 born, or the heads of families, until they were 
 superseded by the Aaronic priesthood. 
 
 THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, 
 
 On the Ten Commandments, taken as a 
 whole, see Note after v. 21. The account 
 of the delivery of them in chap, xix. and in 
 vv, 18—21 of this chap. is in accordance 
 with their importance as the recognized basis 
 of the Covenant between Jehovah and His 
 ancient people (Exod. xxxiv. 27, 28; Deut. 
 iv. 13; 1 K, viii, 21, &c.), and as the Divine 
 testimony against the sinful tendencies in man 
 for all ages, Jewish writers have speculated 
 as to the mode in which the Divine com- 
 
 Be Odd Soeties 
 
 [v. 17—2, 
 
 themselves, lest the Lorp break forth 
 upon them. | 
 
 23 And Moses said unto the Lozn) 
 The people cannot come up to mount 
 Sinai: for thou chargedst us, saying, 
 Set bounds about the mount, and sanc- 
 tify it. 
 
 24. And the Lorp said unto him, 
 Away, get thee down, and thou shalt 
 come up, thou, and Aaron with thee: 
 but let not the priests and the peo- 
 ple break through to come up unto the 
 Lorp, lest he break forth upon them. 
 
 25 So Moses went down unto the 
 people, and spake unto them. 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 18 The people are 
 22 Ldola- 
 
 1 The ten commandments. 
 afraid. 20 Moses comforteth them. 
 
 try ws forbidden. 24 Of what sort the altar 
 should be. 
 ND God spake all these words, 
 saying, 
 
 2. *1 am the Lorp thy God, which 6 
 hare brought thee out of the fait Gira, 
 
 Egypt, out of the house of t bondage. jarvis, 
 
 munication was made to the people (Philo, 
 ‘de Orac.’ c. 9; Palestine Targum, &c.). It 
 may be noticed that, while it is here said that 
 ‘¢God spake all these words,” and in Deut. 
 v. 4, that He ‘‘spake face to face,” in the New 
 ‘Testament the giving of the Law is spoken of as 
 having been through the ministration of angels 
 (Acts vil. 53; Gal. 1, 19; Hebi il? ye 
 can only reconcile these contrasts of language 
 by keeping in mind that God is a Spirit, and 
 that He is essentially present in the agents 
 who are performing His will. A similar dif- 
 ficulty was felt by some in St Augustin’s 
 time in reconciling Gen, i. 1 with John i, 3. 
 (‘Cont. Adimant. Man,’ c, 1,)—Josephus ap- 
 pears as the only witness for the superstition, 
 which was probably common amongst the 
 Pharisees of his day, that it was not lawful to 
 utter the very words in which the Ten Com- 
 mandments were originally expressed (‘ Ant.’ 
 Ill. 5,§4). It is remarkable that there seems 
 to be no trace of this in the rabbinists,—The 
 Two ‘Tables of stone on which the Com- 
 mandments were inscribed are mentioned ch, 
 RNIVO T2y (KEEL ee 
 
 2. which have brought thee out of the land 
 of Egypt, out of the house of bondage| It was a 
 rabbinical question, Why, on this occasion, 
 was not THE LorD rather proclaimed as ‘‘the 
 Creator of Heaven and Earth’? ‘The true 
 answer evidently is, That the Ten Command- 
 ments were at this time addressed by Jehovah 
 
 @ Deut. 5. 
 Psal. 81. 
 
+. 3—5.] BOD UW Sax x. 
 
 3 Thou shalt have no other gods 
 before me. 
 bLev.26. 4 % Thou shalt not make unto thee 
 Psal. 97. 7. any graven image, or any likeness of 
 any thing that is in heaven above, or 
 that zs in the earth beneath, or that zs 
 in the water under the earth: 
 
 5 Thou shalt not bow down thy- 
 self to them, nor serve them: for I 
 the Lorp thy God am a jealous 
 God, visiting the iniquity of the fa- 
 thers upon the children unto the third 
 and fourth generation of them that 
 hate me; 
 
 not merely to human creatures, but to the 
 people whom He had redeemed, to those who 
 had been in bondage, but were now free men, 
 (Exod. vi. 6, 7, xix. 5.) The Command- 
 ments are expressed in absolute terms, ‘They 
 are not sanctioned by outward penalties, as if 
 for slaves, but are addressed at once to the 
 conscience, as for free men. The well-being 
 of the nation called for the infliction of penal- 
 ties, and therefore statutes were passed to 
 punish offenders who blasphemed the name of 
 Jehovah, who profaned the Sabbath, or who 
 committed murder or adultery. (See on Lev. 
 xviii, 2430.) But these penal statutes were 
 not to be the ground of obedience for the true 
 Israelite according to the Covenant. He was 
 to know Jehovah as his Redeemer, and was 
 to obey Him as such, (Cf. Rom. xili. 5; 
 see Note after v. 21, § V.) 
 
 3. before me] Literally, before my face. The 
 meaning is that no god should be worshipped 
 in addition to Jehovah. Cf. v.23. The render- 
 ing in our Prayer-Book, but me, with that of 
 the LXX. adn épod, does not so well repre- 
 sent the Hebrew. ‘The polytheism which was 
 the besetting sin of the Israelites in later times 
 did not exclude Jehovah, but it associated 
 Him with false deities, See Note on xxxiv. 13. 
 
 4. graven image| Any sort of image is 
 here intended. The Hebrew word (fesel) 
 strictly means a carved image, mostly denot- 
 ing one of wood or stone, and in some places 
 it is distinguished from a molten image of 
 metal (massekah): but as molten images were 
 
 finished up with a graver or carving tool, pesel — 
 
 is sometimes applied to them (Is. xl. 19, xliv. 
 ro; Jer. x. 14, &c.), and is frequently used, 
 as it is here, for a general name for images of 
 all sorts, 
 
 or any likeness| ‘This may be rendered, even 
 any likeness. What follows in the verse 
 expresses the whole material creation; it is 
 expanded in detail in Deut. iv, 16—19. 
 
 5. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, 
 nor serve them| ‘The antecedent to them in 
 each clause appears to be the likenesses of 
 things in heaven and earth spoken of in the 
 preceding verse. It has been observed that, 
 according to the Hebrew idiom, these clauses 
 may have a strict grammatical connection 
 with ‘‘ Thou shalt not make,” &c. in w, 4. 
 The meaning certainly is to prohibit the making 
 of the likeness of any material thing, 7 order to 
 
 worship it. For a similar form of expression, 
 see Num. xxii, 12. As the First Command- 
 ment forbids the worship of any false god, 
 seen or unseen, it is here forbidden to worship 
 an image of any sort, whether the figure of a 
 false deity or one in any way symbolical of 
 Jehovah (see on xxxii. 4). The spiritual acts 
 of worship were symbolized in the furniture 
 and ritual of the Tabernacle and the Altar, 
 and for this end the forms of living things 
 might be employed as in the case of the Che- 
 rubim (see on xxv, 18): but the presence of 
 the invisible God was to be marked by no 
 symbol of Himself, but by His words written 
 on stones, preserved in the Ark in the Holy 
 of Holies and covered by the Mercy-seat. 
 On the repudiation of images of the Deity 
 by the ancient Persians, see Herodot. I. 131; 
 Strabo, Xv. p. 732; and by the earliest legis- 
 lators of Rome, see Plut. ‘Numa,’ 8; Au- 
 gustin, ‘de Civ. Dei,’ Iv. 31. 
 
 The Jews, not recognizing the connection 
 between vv. 4 and 5, have imagined wv. 4 to 
 be a prohibition of the exercise of the arts of 
 painting and sculpture. Considering the Che- 
 rubim of the Mercy-seat and of the curtains 
 of the Tabernacle, the pomegranates of the 
 High-priest’s robe, and the fruits and flowers 
 of the Candlestick, to say nothing of the 
 sculptures of the Temple in later times (1 K, 
 vi. 23 Sq., Vii. 27 Sq.), any such notion as this 
 must show the prejudiced and fragmentary 
 way in which they were tempted to study the 
 Scriptures. Philo declares that Moses con- 
 demned to perpetual banishment the cheating 
 arts (€miBovAor réyvar) Of painters and sculp- 
 tors (‘Quis div. rer. heres.’ c, 35; ‘de Orac.’ 
 c. 29). Josephus charges Solomon with a 
 breach of the Law, on account of the oxen 
 which supported the brazen sea, and the lions 
 which adorned his throne (‘ Ant.’ VIII. 7, § 5): 
 and in direct contradiction of Exod, xxvi. 31, 
 he denies that the vail which concealed the 
 Most Holy Place was ornamented with living 
 creatures. (‘Ant.’ 111. 6, § 4.) This preju- 
 dice, from the time when the pharisaic tend- 
 ency began to work on the mind of the 
 nation, must have effectually checked the pro- 
 gress of the imitative arts. 
 
 for I the Lorp thy God am a jealous God} 
 Deut. vi. 15; Josh. xxiv. 19; Is, xlil. 8, xlvilil. 11; 
 Nahum i. 2. This reason applies to the First, 
 as well as to the Second Commandment. ‘The 
 truth expressed in it was declared more fully 
 
 331 
 
¢ Lev. 19. 
 
 G2 
 No 
 
 6 And shewing mercy unto thou- 
 sands of them that love me, and keep 
 my commandments. 
 
 ¢’Thou shalt not take the 
 name of the Lorp thy God in 
 
 to Moses when the name of Jehovah was pro- 
 claimed to him after he had interceded for 
 Israel on account of the golden calf (xxxiv. 
 6, 7; see note). 
 
 visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the 
 children| ‘The visitation here spoken of can 
 hardly be any other than that which we are 
 accustomed to witness in the common experi- 
 ence of life. (Cf. xxxiv. 7; Jer. xxxil. 18.) 
 Sons and remote descendants inherit the con- 
 sequences of their fathers’ sins, in disease, 
 poverty, captivity, with all the mfluences of 
 bad example and evil communications. (See 
 Revevsavig93) Mam. (xs 7 sqpje ihe ime 
 herited curse” seems to fall often most heavily 
 on the least guilty persons, as is abundantly 
 proved in all history and is pointedly illustrated 
 in Greek tragedy. But such suffering must 
 always be free from the sting of conscience; it 
 is not like the visitation for sin on the in- 
 dividual by whom the sm has been committed. 
 The suffering, or loss of advantages, entailed 
 on the unoffending son, is a condition under 
 which he has to carry on the struggle of 
 life, and, like all other inevitable conditions 
 imposed upon men, it cannot tend to his 
 ultimate disadvantage, if he struggles well 
 and perseveres to the end. He may never 
 attain in this world to a high standard of 
 knowledge, or of outward conduct, compared 
 with others, but the Searcher of hearts will 
 regard him with favour, not in proportion to 
 his visible conduct, but to his unseen struggles, 
 As regards the administration of justice by 
 earthly tribunals, the Law holds good, ‘‘’The 
 fathers shall net be put to death for the 
 children, neither shall the children be put to 
 death for the fathers; every man shall be put 
 to death for his own sin” (Deut. xxiv. 16). 
 The same principle is carried out in spiritual 
 matters by the Supreme Judge. The Israelites 
 in a later age made a confusion in the use of 
 their common proverb, ‘The fathers have 
 eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are 
 set on edge.” ‘There would have been truth 
 in this saying had it been used only in reference 
 to the mere natural consequences of their 
 fathers’ sins. In this sense their teeth were 
 set on edge by the sour grapes their fathers 
 had eaten. But the Prophets pointed out the 
 falsehood involved in the proverb as it was 
 understood by the people. ‘They showed that 
 it was utterly false when applied to the spiritual 
 relation in which each person stands in the 
 judgment of Him who is no respecter of per- 
 sons. (Jer. xxxl. 29, 30; Ezek. xviil, z—45q.) 
 
 BO DW Sy eX, 
 
 [v. 6—8. 
 
 vain; for the Lorp will not hold 
 him guiltless that taketh his name in 
 vain. 
 
 8 Remember the sabbath day, to 
 keep it holy. 
 
 Another explanation of the words appears in 
 the Targums, and is favoured by some of the 
 Fathers and other commentators, Christian and 
 Jewish. It assumes that the words refer only 
 to the children who go on sinning so as to fill 
 up the measure of their fathers’ iniquities in 
 the manner spoken of Lev. xxvi. 39; Is. Ixv. 75 
 Jer. xvi. 1o—13; Matt. xxii. 2932. (See 
 Hengst. ‘Pent.’ Vol. 11. p. 446.) But this 
 seems unworthily to reduce the Divine words 
 to a mere truism. It makes them say in an 
 awkward mannner no more than that the 
 guilty sons shall be punished as well as the 
 guilty fathers, 
 
 6. unto thousands|unto the thousandth 
 generation. Jehovah’s visitations of chas- 
 tisement extend to the third and fourth genera- 
 tion, his visitations of mercy to the thousandth; 
 that is, for ever. ‘That this is the true ren- 
 dering seems to follow from Deut. vii. 9. 
 Cf. 2 S. vil. 15, 16. So Syr., Onk., Leo Juda, 
 Geneva French, Rosen., Zunz, Schott., Kno- 
 bel, Keil, Herx., and Wogue Our version is 
 supported by the LX X., Vulg., Saadia, Luther, 
 and de Wette, 
 
 7. Our translators have followed the LXX., 
 Aquila, the Vulgate, Augustin (‘Serm.’ VIII.), 
 and Theodoret (‘Quest. in Exod.’ 41), in 
 making the ‘Third Commandment bear upon 
 any profane and idle utterance of the name of 
 God. Saadia, the Syriac, some of the Rabbin- 
 ists, and the greater number of the critics of 
 our day, give it the sense, Thou shalt not swear 
 Jalsely by the name of Jehovah thy God. ‘The 
 Hebrew word which answers to in vain may 
 be rendered either way. ‘The two abuses of 
 the sacred name seem to be distinguished in 
 Lev, xix. 12, Our Version is probably right in 
 giving the rendering which is more inclusive. 
 To swear falsely is undoubtedly a profanation 
 of the name of God; and looking at the matter 
 on its practical side, the man who, in a right 
 spirit, avoids the idle use of the Name will be 
 incapable of swearing falsely. Hence there 
 may be a reference to this Commandment, as 
 well as to Lev. xix. 12, in Matt. v. 33. The 
 caution that a breach of ‘this Commandment 
 incurs guilt in the eyes of Jehovah is especially 
 appropriate, in consequence of the ease with 
 which the temptation to take God’s name in 
 vain besets men-in their common intercourse 
 with each other. 
 
 8. Remember the sabbath day} ‘These words 
 have been taken to refer to the observance of 
 the Sabbath day as an old usage dating’ back 
 
Y chap. 23. 
 12 
 
 Ezek. 20. 
 it 
 Luke 13. 
 (4s 
 
 v. 9-—12. | 
 
 g “Six days shalt thou labour, and 
 do all thy work: 
 
 10 But the seventh day zs the sab- 
 bath of the Lorp thy God: im it 
 thou shalt not do any work, thou, 
 nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy 
 manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor 
 thy cattle, nor thy stranger that zs 
 within thy gates: 
 
 to the Patriarchs, or even to the creation of 
 the world, There is however no distinct evi- 
 dence that the Sabbath, as a formal ordi- 
 nance, was recognized before the time of Mo- 
 ses. ‘The expressions of Nehemiah (ix. 14), 
 of Ezekiel (xx. 10, 11, 12), and, perhaps, of 
 Moses himself (Deut. v. 15), may be taken 
 to intimate that the observance was regarded 
 as originating in the Law given on Mount 
 Sinai, The most ancient testimonies favour 
 this view. (See Note at end of this Chapter. 
 Also note on Gen. ii.2.) It is now generally 
 admitted that the attempts to trace the observ- 
 ance in heathen antiquity have failed. It has 
 been alleged that the word remember may be 
 reasonably explained in one of two ways with- 
 out adopting the inference that has been men- 
 tioned; it may either be used in the sense of 
 keep in mind what is here enjoined for the first 
 time, or it may refer back to what is related in 
 ch. xvi. where the Sabbath day is first noticed, 
 in giving the law for collecting the manna. 
 to keep it holy| See Note after v. 21, § I. 
 
 10. the sabbath of the Lorp thy God] a 
 Sabbathto Jehovah thy God, It may be 
 observed that. the word sabbath (more pro- 
 perly, shabbath) has no etymological connec- 
 tion with sheba’, the Hebrew for seven. ‘The 
 proper meaning of sabbath is, rest after labour. 
 
 thy stranger that is within thy gates| ‘The 
 
 Hebrew word geer does not mean a stranger. 
 
 (that is an unknown person), but, according 
 to its mere derivation, a Jodger, or sojourner, 
 In this place it denotes one who had come 
 from another people to take up his permanent 
 abode among the Israelites, and who might 
 have been well known to his neighbours. Our 
 word foreigner, in its common use, seems best 
 to answer to it here. The LXX, renders geer 
 by rpoondutos (proselyte), rapotkos, and é€vos. 
 That the word did not primarily refer to 
 
 foreign domestic servants (though all such 
 
 were included under it) is to be inferred from 
 the term used for gates (sha’arim), signifying 
 not the doors of a private dwelling, but the 
 gates of a town or camp. 
 
 11. wherefore the Lorp blessed the sabbath 
 day| Our Communion Service and Catechism 
 follow the reading or the LX X. and the earlier 
 English Versions, in calling this the seventh 
 
 PXODUSI XX, 
 
 heaven and earth, the sea, and all that 
 in them zs, and rested the seventh 
 day: wherefore the Lorp blessed the 
 sabbath day, and hallowed it. 
 
 12 4 “Honour thy father and thy” Deut. s. 
 mother: that thy days may be long Madiee 
 upon the land which the Lorp thy fy. «. ». 
 
 God giveth thee. 
 
 day instead of the sabbath day, On the mean- 
 ing of the verse, see Note after v. 21. 
 
 12. Honour thy father and thy mother| Ac- 
 cording to our usage, the Fifth Command- 
 ment is placed as the first in the second table ; 
 and this is necessarily involved in the common 
 division of the Commandments into our duty 
 towards God and our duty towards men. 
 But the more ancient, and probably the better, 
 division allots five Commandments to each 
 Table. The connection between the first four 
 Commandments and the Fifth exists in the 
 truth that all faith in God centres in the filial 
 feeling. Our parents stand between us and 
 God in a way in which no other beings can. 
 It is worthy of note that the honouring of 
 parents and the keeping of the Sabbath day, 
 which is the same as honouring God, are com- 
 bined in one precept in Lev. xix. 3.—In con- 
 nection with this, it may be observed that the 
 Fifth Commandment and the first part of the 
 Fourth are the only portions of the Decalogue 
 which are expressed in a positive form. See 
 Note after v. 21, § IV. On the maintenance 
 of parental authority, see xxi, 15, 17; Deut. 
 Xxi, 18 —2I. 
 
 that thy days may be long upon the land] 
 Filial respect is the ground of national per- 
 manence, When the Jews were about to be 
 cast out of their land, the rebuke of the pro- 
 phet was, that they had not walked in the old 
 paths and had not respected the voice of their 
 fathers as the sons of Jonadab had done (Jer. 
 vi. 16, xxxv. 18, 19). And when in later 
 times the land had been restored to them, 
 and they were about to be cast out of it a 
 second time, the great sin of which they were 
 convicted was, that they had set aside this 
 Fifth Commandment for the sake of their own 
 traditions. (Matt. xv. 4—6; Mark vii. ro, 11.) 
 Every other nation that has a history bears 
 witness to the same truth. Rome owed her 
 strength, as well as the permanence of her in- 
 fluence after she had politically perished, to 
 her steady maintenance of the patria potestas 
 (Maine, ‘Ancient Law,’ p. 135). China has 
 mainly owed her long duration to the simple 
 way in which she has uniformly acknowledged 
 the authority of fathers. ‘The Divine words 
 were addressed emphatically to Israel, but they 
 
 330 
 
 11 For zm six days the Lorp made ¢ Gen. 2.2. 
 
EXO DAS? koe: [v: 13—19-- 
 13 £ Thou shalt not kill. 
 14 Thou shalt not commit adul- 
 tery. 
 
 334 
 
 £ Matt. 5. 
 21. 
 
 his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that 
 is thy peeuvore $3 
 18 @ And “all the people saw the Heb, 12, 
 
 # Rom. 7. 
 
 1§ Thou shalt not steal. 
 
 16 Thou shalt not bear false wit- 
 ness against thy neighbour. 
 
 17 “Thou shalt not covet thy 
 neighbour’s house, thou shalt not 
 covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his 
 manservant, nor his maidservant, nor 
 
 set forth a universal principle of national life. 
 St Paul calls this Commandment, ‘‘the first 
 commandment with promise” (Eph, vi. 2); 
 the promise is fulfilled in God’s government 
 of the whole world. ‘The narrow view which 
 Selden and others have taken of the Com- 
 mandment, that it implied no more than a 
 prediction that the children of Israel should 
 possess the land of Canaan on the condition 
 stated, is alien to the spirit of the Decalogue. 
 (See Note after v. 21, § VI.) 
 
 138,14. ‘The Sixth and Seventh Command- 
 ments are amongst those utterances of the 
 Law which our Saviour, in the Sermon on the 
 Mount, took to illustrate the relation in which 
 the Gospel stands to the Law. Whatever 
 range of meaning we are to give to the expres- 
 sion in Matt. v. 17, that Christ came not to 
 destroy but to fu/il (mdypdca), we can 
 hardly exclude from it, in its bearing on the 
 discourse that follows in vv, 18—,48, the sense, 
 to set forth perfectly in the way of teaching. 
 (Cf. Rom. xv. 19; Col. i. 25.) ‘The Scribes 
 and Pharisees failed perfectly to set forth the 
 Law, in their teaching as well as in their prac- 
 tice; they taught the mere words in their 
 dry external relations; ‘‘they gave the husk 
 without the kernel.” ‘Their righteousness, 
 both that which they taught and that which 
 they practised, therefore fell short of the true 
 standard (Matt. v.20). If this view of the 
 word fu/fl is admitted, our Saviour’s words 
 respecting these Commandments (wv. 2I—32) 
 cannot be taken as an external supplement to 
 the Law, or as a new adaptation of it to a 
 changed order of things, but as a perfect un- 
 folding, in the most practical form, of the 
 meaning which the Commandments had from 
 the beginning, and which had been, with 
 different degrees of distinctness, shadowed 
 forth to all who wisely and devoutly obeyed 
 the Law under the Old Dispensation, ‘The 
 passage in St Matthew (v. 21—32) is there- 
 fore the best comment on these two verses of 
 Exodus, St Augustin says that the purpose 
 of Christ’s coming was, zon ut Legi adderentur 
 que deerant, sed ut fierent que scripta erant. 
 ‘Cont, Faust.’ XVII. 6. 
 
 15. The right of property is sanctioned 
 
 thunderings, and the lightnings, and * 
 the noise of the trumpet, and the 
 mountain smoking: and when the 
 people saw it, they removed, and 
 stood afar off. 
 
 1g And they said unto Moses, ¢ Deut s. 
 Speak thou with us, and we will 2%. 46. 
 
 in the Eighth Commandment by an external 
 rule: its deeper meaning is involved in the 
 ‘Tenth Commandment, 
 
 17, As the Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth 
 Commandments forbid us to injure our neigh- 
 bour in deed, the Ninth forbids us to injure 
 him in word, and the Tenth, in thought. No 
 human eye can see the coveting heart; it is 
 witnessed only by him who possesses it and 
 by Him to whom all things are naked and 
 open. But it is the root of all sins against 
 our neighbour in word or in deed (Jam. i. 
 14, 15). ‘The man who is acceptable before 
 God, walking uprightly, not backbiting with 
 his tongue, nor doing evil to his neighbour, 
 is he who ‘speaketh the truth IN HIS 
 HEART,” Ps, xv. 2, 3. St Paul speaks of the 
 operation of this Commandment on his own 
 heart as the means of revealing to him the 
 holiness of the Law (Rom, vii. 7), The direct 
 connection of the Commandments of the 
 Second Table with the principle of love be- 
 tween man and man, is affirmed Matt. xxii. 
 39, 40; Rom, xiil. 9, 10; Gal. v. 14,—On the 
 variations between this and the parallel place 
 in Deut. v. 21, see Note after v. 21, § Il. 
 
 There is a curious interpolation in the 
 Samaritan text following the Tenth Com- 
 mandment. ‘The Israelites are commanded to 
 set up on Mount Gerizim two great plastered 
 stones with the words of the Law inscribed 
 on them, to build there an Altar, and to sacri- 
 fice upon it Burnt-offerings and Peace-offer- 
 ings. ‘The passage is evidently made up from 
 Deut. xxvii. 2—7, with some expressions 
 from Deut. xi. 30, Gerizim being substituted 
 for Ebal, See on Deut. xxvii, z—7. 
 
 18—21. ‘This narrative is amplified in 
 Deut. v. 22—31. The people had realized the 
 terrors of the voice of Jehovah in the utter- 
 ance of the ‘Ten Words of the Testimony, 
 and they feared for their lives. ‘Though 
 Moses encouraged them, they were permitted 
 to withdraw and to stand afar off, at their 
 tent doors (see Deut. v. 30). It would appear, 
 according to xix, 24, that Aaron on this 
 occasion accompanied Moses in drawing near 
 to the thick darkness, Cf, xxiv. 18. ~ 
 
V. 20, 21.] 
 
 hear: but @let not God speak with 
 us, lest we die. 
 
 20 And Moses said unto the peo- 
 ple, Fear not: for God is come to 
 prove you, and that his fear may 
 
 NOTE on Cuap. 
 
 On THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. 
 
 I. Zhe Name. Il. What was written on the 
 Stones? III. The Division into Ten. IV. 
 The Two Tables. V. The Commandments 
 as A TESTIMONY. VI. Sreadth of their 
 meaning. 
 
 § I. 
 
 The Hebrew name which is rendered in 
 our Version THE TEN COMMANDMENTS 
 (Q9375 NIWyY) occurs in Exod. xxxiv. 
 28; Deut. iv. 13, x. 4. It literally means the 
 Ten Words, as it stands in the margin of our 
 Bible; LXX. of déxa Aoyot, OY Ta S€ka py- 
 para; Vulg. decem verba. But the Hebrew 
 substantive 72% often denotes a mandate 
 (Josh. i. 13; Esth. i. 19); and the common 
 English rendering may be therefore justified. 
 In Ex. xxiv, 12, the Ten Commandments are 
 called the Law, even the Command- 
 ment: the latter word (718) occurs in its 
 plural form in the Second Commandment, 
 Ex. xx. 6; Deut. v.10. ‘They are elsewhere 
 called THE WoRDS OF THE COVENANT 
 (x. xxxiv. 28, where the strict rendering 
 would be, the Words of the Covenant, even 
 the Ten Words), THE ‘TABLES OF THE COVE- 
 NANT (Deut. ix. 9, 11, 15), and simply THE 
 COVENANT (Deut. iv. 13: 1 K. vill. a1; 
 2 Chron. vi. 11); also THE Two TABLES 
 (Deut. ix. 10, 17). But the most frequent 
 name for them in the Old Testament is, THE 
 TESTIMONY! (MIVA, LXX. 7d papripioy 
 Or ta paptvpia), OY THE TWO TABLES OF 
 THE TESTIMONY’. In the New Testament 
 they are called simply THE COMMANDMENTS? 
 (ai evrodai). ‘The name DECALOGUE (6 de- 
 ka\oyos) is found first in Clement of Alex- 
 andria, and was commonly used by the 
 Fathers who followed him. 
 
 We thus know that the Tables were two, 
 and that the Commandments were ten, in 
 number, But the Scriptures do not, by any 
 direct statements, enable us to determine with 
 precision how the ‘Ten Commandments are 
 severally to be made out, nor how they are to 
 be allotted to the Two Tables. On each of 
 these points various opinions have been held. 
 
 Beek xvi, 34, XXVe 10, 22, xxx,-6,-xl, 20: 
 Ley. xvi. 13, &c. &c. 
 
 Palins xxxi. 18, xxxii. 18, XXXiv. 20. 
 
 3 Matt. xix. 17; Mark x. 19; Luke xviii. 20; 
 Rom. xiii. 9. 
 
 Pee. CHO aX 
 
 o> 
 
 be before your faces, that ye sin 
 not. 
 21 And the people stood afar off, 
 and Moses drew near unto the thick 
 darkness where God was. 
 
 XX. Uv. I—I 7s 
 
 § Il. 
 
 But there is a question which rightly claims 
 precedence of these: What actually were the 
 ‘Words of Jehovah that were engraven on the 
 Tables of Stone? We have two distinct state- 
 ments, one in Exodus (xx. 1—17) and one in 
 Deuteronomy (v. 6—21), apparently of equal 
 authority, but differing from each other in 
 several weighty particulars. Each is said, with 
 reiterated emphasis, to contain the words that 
 were actually spoken by the LorD, and written 
 by Him upon the stones‘, 
 
 ‘The variations which are of most import- 
 ance are in the Commandments which we com- 
 monly call the Fourth, the Fifth, and the Tenth. 
 ‘The two copies of these are here placed side 
 by side. ‘The expressions in Deuteronomy 
 which differ in the original Hebrew from the 
 corresponding ones in Exodus, are in italics, 
 
 and the additional clauses are in brackets. 
 
 EXODUS Xx. 
 
 IV. (wv, 8—11.) 
 
 Remember the sab- 
 bath day, to keep it 
 holy. Six days shalt 
 thou labour, and do 
 all thy work: But the 
 seventh day is the sab- 
 bath of the Lorp thy 
 God: in it thou shalt 
 not do any work, thou, 
 nor thy son, nor thy 
 daughter, thy man- 
 servant, nor thy maid- 
 servant, nor thy cattle, 
 nor thy stranger that 
 is within thy gates: 
 For in six days the 
 LorD made _ heaven 
 and earth, the sea, and 
 all that in them is, and 
 rested the seventh day: 
 wherefore the Lorp 
 blessed the sabbath 
 day, and hallowed it. 
 
 Le 
 
 DEUT.Y: 
 
 IV. (wv. 12—15.) 
 
 Keep the sabbath 
 day to sanctify it, [as 
 the Lorp thy God hath 
 commanded thee.| Six 
 days thou shalt labour, 
 and do all thy work: 
 But the seventh day 
 is the sabbath of the 
 Lorp thy God: in it 
 thou shalt not do any 
 work, thou, nor thy 
 son, nor thy daughter, 
 nor thy manservant, 
 nor thy maidservant, 
 [wor thine ox, nor thine 
 ass,| nor any of thy 
 cattle, nor thy stranger 
 that is within thy 
 gates; [that thy man- 
 servant and thy maid= 
 servant may rest as 
 well as thou.| And 
 remember that thou 
 wast a servant in the 
 land of Egypt, and 
 that the Lorp thy God 
 brought thee out thence 
 through a mighty hand 
 and by a stretched out 
 
 4 Ex. xx. 1, xxiv. 12, xxxi. 18, xxxii, 15, 163 
 Deut. We'4, 63°22) ive 13, 1X 10, ; 
 
 U1 
 
Via (UV. 1o6) 
 Honour thy father 
 and thy mother: that 
 thy days may be long 
 upon the land which 
 the Lorp thy God 
 giveth thee. 
 
 mS Ly.) 
 Thou shalt not covet 
 thy neighbour’s house, 
 thou shalt not covet 
 thy neighbour’s wife, 
 nor his manservant, 
 nor his maidservant, 
 nor his ox, nor his ass, 
 nor any thing that is 
 
 thy neighbour’s. 
 
 BX OD US, XX, 
 
 arm: therefore the 
 Lorpv thy God com- 
 manded thee to keep the 
 sabbath day. 
 
 V. (w. 16.) 
 
 Honour thy father 
 and thy mother, [as 
 the Lorp thy God hath 
 commanded thee]; that 
 thy days may be pro- 
 longed, [and that it 
 may go well with thee, 
 in the land which 
 the Lorp thy God 
 giveth thee. 
 
 Oe Che ae 
 
 Neither shalt thou 
 desire thy neighbour’s 
 wife, neither shalt thou 
 covet thy neighbour’s 
 house, [is field], or 
 his manservant, or his 
 maidservant, his ox, or 
 his ass, or any thing 
 that is thy neighbour’s. 
 
 In the Fourth Commandment, it will be 
 seen that in Deuteronomy :— 
 
 (1) “Keep (10%) the Sabbath day,” is 
 read instead of ‘‘Remember (7)3!) the Sab- 
 
 bath day.” 
 
 (2) Three fresh clauses are inserted :—- 
 
 ‘¢ As the Lorp thy God hath commanded 
 thee.” 
 
 *¢Nor thine ox nor thine ass.” 
 
 ‘That thy manservant and thy maid- 
 servant may rest as well as thou.” 
 
 (3) A different reason is given for the Com- 
 mandment, referring to the deliverance of the 
 Israelites from Egypt, instead of the rest of 
 God after the six works of Creation. 
 
 In the Fifth, Deuteronomy inserts the same 
 expression as it does in the Fourth, ‘‘as the 
 Lorp thy God hath commanded thee ;” and 
 also the words, ‘‘ that it may go well with thee.” 
 
 In the ‘Tenth, it transposes ‘‘thy neighbour’s 
 house,” and ‘‘thy neighbour’s wife ;” it inserts 
 ‘‘his field,” and it makes the two parts of the 
 Commandment more distinct by the use of a 
 different verb in the imperative mood in each. 
 The verb rendered desire (712M) is the same 
 that is rendered covet in Exodus, but the one 
 here rendered covet is a different one (}§). 
 
 It should also be observed that, in Deut. v. 
 verses 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 are linked together by 
 the copulative conjunction. ‘The few other 
 slight variations do not affect the sense. 
 
 It has been generally assumed that the whole 
 of one or other of these copies was written on 
 the ‘Tables. Most commentators have sup- 
 posed that the original document is in Exodus, 
 and that the author of Deuteronomy wrote 
 from memory, with variations suggested at 
 the time, Others have conceived that Deu- 
 
 teronomy must furnish the more correct form, 
 since the Tables must have been in actual 
 existence when the book was written. But 
 neither of these views can be fairly reconciled 
 with the statements in Exodus and Deutero- 
 nomy to which reference has been made. If 
 either copy, as a whole, represents what was 
 written on the Tables, it is obvious that the 
 other cannot do so. 
 
 A conjecture which seems to deserve respect 
 has been put forth by Ewald. He supposes 
 that the original Commandments were all in 
 the same terse and simple form of expression 
 as appears (both in Exodus and Deutero- 
 nomy) in the First, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, 
 and Ninth, such as would be most suitable for 
 recollection, and that the passages in each copy 
 in which the most important variations are 
 found were comments added when the Books 
 were written. It is not necessary to involve 
 this theory with any question as to the author- 
 ship of the Books, or with any doubt as to the 
 comments being the words of God? given by 
 Moses as much as the Commandments, strictly 
 so called, that were written on the Tables, 
 In reference to the most important of the 
 differences, that relating to the reason for the 
 observance of the Sabbath day, the thoughts 
 are in no degree discordant, and each sets 
 forth what is entirely worthy of, and consistent 
 with, the Divine Law®.  Slighter verbal or 
 literal variations, with no important difference 
 of meaning (such as keep for remember), may 
 perhaps be ascribed to copyists?, 
 
 It may be supposed then that the Ten Words 
 of Jehovah, with the prefatory sentence, were 
 to this effect, assuming that each Table con- 
 tained Five Commandments, See §[V. 
 
 Iam Jehovah thy God who have brought 
 thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house 
 of bondage. 
 
 FIRST TABLE. 
 
 1. Thou shalt have no other God* before me. 
 
 li. Thou shalt not make to thee any graven 
 image. 
 
 iii. Thou shalt not take the name of Jehovah 
 thy God in vain. 
 
 iv. Thou shalt remember the Sabbath day, to 
 keep it holy. 
 
 v. Thou shalt bem thy father and thy 
 mother, 
 
 1 See Ex. xx. I. 
 
 2 See the following Note, § III. 
 
 3 What is assumed, on the theory here stated, 
 to be the comment on both the First and Second 
 Commandments (‘‘ For I the Lorp thy God am 
 a jealous God,” &c. See on Ex. xx. §) occurs 
 in a somewhat different and more diffuse form 
 in Ex. xxxiv. 6, 7. Does not a comparison of 
 the two passages tend to confirm the supposition 
 that the words are not a part of the original Ten 
 Commandments, but that they were quoted here 
 in a condensed form by Moses, as bearing on the 
 two Commandments, when the book of Exodus 
 was put together? 4 See on Ex, xx. 3. 
 
EXODUS: OX Xt 
 
 SECOND TABLE. 
 vi. Thou shalt not kill. 
 vii. Thou shalt not commit adultery. 
 Thou shalt not steal. 
 ix. Thou shalt not bear false witness. 
 x. Thou shalt not covet. 
 
 A practical illustration from the usage of 
 different ages may tend to shew the proba- 
 bility that the ‘Ten Commandments were 
 familiarly known in such a compendious form 
 as this, at a time when they were used not 
 only as the common watchwords of duty, but 
 as the axioms of the Law in its actual opera- 
 tion. In those copies of the Commandments 
 which have been used in different branches of 
 the Church for the instruction of its members, 
 the form has almost always been more or less 
 abbreviated of a part, or the whole, of those 
 which are the most expanded in Exodus and 
 Deuteronomy; namely, the Second, Third, 
 Fourth, Fifth, and Tenth!, ‘The earliest book 
 of Christian instruction in which they are 
 given at full length as they stand in Exodus, 
 appears to be ‘‘the Prymer in English,” of 
 about A.D. 1400, printed in Maskell’s ‘Monu- 
 menta Ritualia” (Vol. 11. p.177). They are also 
 given in fullin the Primer of Edward VI. (A.D. 
 1553). When they were first introduced into 
 our Communion Service in the Second Prayer 
 Book of Edward VI. (A.D, 1552), the words 
 in the introductory sentence, ‘‘ which have 
 brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out 
 of the house of bondage,” were unfortunately 
 omitted, and have not been restored in suc- 
 ceeding editions. But they are not only 
 retained in our Catechism, but are made a 
 special topic of instruction in connection with 
 the Commandments in Nowell’s larger Cate- 
 chism 2, 
 
 § III. 
 
 The mode in which the Commandments 
 are divided into ‘Ten in our own Service Book 
 agrees with the most ancient authorities, Jew- 
 ish as well as Christian, and the usage of the 
 Eastern Church. It appears to be based on 
 the clearest view of the subject matter, as it is 
 set forth in the sacred text. 
 
 1 Sulp. Sev. ‘Sac. Hist.’ lib. 1. ‘Synopsis 
 Sac. Script.’ ascribed to St Athanasius. Suidas 
 s. whatly. King Alfred’s ‘Laws.’ ‘The Luthe- 
 ran Cat.’ (in which what aré here called the 
 sacred writers’ comments are named affendices). 
 ‘The Institution,’ &c. and ‘The Erudition,’-&c. 
 of Henry VIII. The Catechism of Edward VI. 
 The Douay Catechism. The Catechism of the 
 Greek Church, &c. &c. 
 
 2 p. 23. Edit. Jacobson. 
 
 3 This division is recognized in Philo, ‘de 
 Orac.’ c. 12, 22, 31; ‘Quis rer. div. heres.’ c. 35. 
 Joseph. ‘Ant.’ III. 5, §5. Origen ‘Hom. in Exod.’ 
 Vill. Jerome ‘in Ephes.’ vi. 2. Sulp. Sev. ‘Sac. 
 Hist.?1. ‘Synopsis S.S.’ ascribed to Athanasius. 
 Suidas s. rAaiiy. The Catechism of the Greek 
 Church. ‘The Institution,’ &c. and ‘Fhe Eru- 
 
 Neti 1 
 
 But another arrangement, which is first 
 found distinctly stated in St Augustin‘, de- 
 mands attention from its having been univer- 
 sally adopted by the Western Church until 
 the Reformation. ‘The Second Command- 
 ment is added to the First (or, in some of the 
 abridged forms, omitted altogether), and the 
 number ten is made out by treating the ‘Tenth 
 as two Commandments. St Augustin, fol- 
 lowing Deuteronomy, and the LXX. in Exo- 
 dus (see below), makes the Ninth ‘‘’Thou shalt 
 not covet thy neighbour’s wife,” and the 
 Tenth ‘Thou shait not covet thy neigh- 
 bour’s house,” &c.: while others, following 
 the Hebrew text of Exodus, reverse this order. 
 In some forms used by the Western Church 
 the whole paragraph on coveting is kept entire, 
 but it is headed as ‘‘the Ninth and Tenth 
 Commandments®.” ‘The general arrangement 
 here spoken of was used by the Church in 
 Britain before the Reformation ®, and is still re- 
 tained by the Lutheran as well as the Romish 
 Church. 
 
 An arrangement unlike either of these may 
 be traced to the fourth century, is distinctly 
 set forth in the Targum of Palestine (which 
 probably belongs to the seventh century), 
 and has been adopted by Maimonides, Aben- 
 Ezra, and other Jewish authorities down to 
 the present day. The First Word is identified 
 with ‘‘I am the Lorp thy God which brought 
 thee out of the land of Egypt” (which cannot 
 of course be properly called a Commandment), 
 and the Second Word is made, as in the ar- 
 rangement last mentioned, to include what 
 we reckon as the First and Second Com- 
 mandments. 
 
 The subject matter itself seems to suggest 
 grave and obvious objections to the two latter 
 arrangements. ‘There is a clear distinction 
 between polytheism and idolatry which en- 
 titles each to a distinct Commandment: and 
 the sin of coveting our neighbour’s possessions 
 is essentially the same in its nature, whatever 
 may be the object coveted. > 
 
 It is worthy of notice in regard to the se- 
 quence of the Commandments, that the LX X. 
 in Ex. xx. (according to the Vatican text) and 
 Suidas (s. rAaégtv) place vii. and viii. before vi., 
 and transpose the Aouse and the wife in x.; and 
 that Philo places vii before vi. according to 
 
 dition,’ &c. of Henry VIII. The Primer of 
 1553, &c. &c.—The testimony of Clement of 
 Alexandria, ‘Stromat.’ VI. § 137, is ambiguous, 
 and has been quoted both for and against the 
 arrangement ; see Suicer s. dexdAoyos, and Kurtz, 
 ‘Old Covenant,’ III. 124. 
 
 4 ‘Quest. in Exod.’ LXXI. 
 &e. 
 
 5 The Trent and Lutheran Catechisms. 
 
 6 King Alfred’s ‘Laws.’—The ‘Speculum’ of 
 St Edmund, Archbishop of Canterbury (5234— 
 1242), and the ‘Treatises’ of Richard Hampole 
 (circ. 1340), published by the Early English Text 
 Society. —The Primer of 1400, &c. &ce. ' 
 
 V¢ 
 
 Serm. VIII. 1X. 
 
 337 
 
338 
 
 the order recognized in Mark x. 19; Luke 
 Xvill. 20; Rom, xiii. 9; James ii. rr. The 
 usual order is preserved by the other ancient 
 versions in Exodus, and by the LXX. in 
 Deut. v.; as it is also, as regards vi. and vii., 
 in Matt. v. 21, 27, xix. 18, 
 
 eV, 
 
 The distribution of the Commandments be- 
 tween the Two ‘Tables which is most familiar 
 to us, allotting four to the First ‘Table and 
 six to the Second, is first mentioned by St 
 Augustine, though it is not approved by him. 
 It is based on a distinction that lies on the 
 surface, and that easily adapts itself to mo- 
 dern ethical systems, between our duty to- 
 wards God and our duty towards our neigh- 
 bour!. ‘The division approved by St Augus- 
 tine was, in relation to the matter in each 
 Table, the same; but as he united the First 
 and Second Commandments into one, and di- 
 vided the Tenth into two, he made the First 
 ‘Table to comprise three Commandments, and 
 the Second Table, seven. He mystically as- 
 sociated the first of these numbers with the 
 Persons of the Trinity, and the latter with the 
 Sabbatical institution ?, 
 
 But the more symmetrical arrangement 
 which allots five Commandments to each Table 
 is supported by the most ancient authorities, 
 and is approved by several modern critics. It 
 is also countenanced by Rom. xiii. 9, where the 
 complete Second Table appears to be spoken 
 of as not including the Fifth Commandment. 
 
 Philo places the Fifth Commandment last 
 in the First Table, and calls it a link between 
 the Two Tables. On the reason of this desig- 
 nation of his, see on Ex. xx. 12. The real 
 distinction between the Tables appears to be 
 that the First relates to the duties which arise 
 from our Filial relations, the Second to those 
 which arise from our Fraternal relations, 
 But as the Commandments represent the es- 
 sence of law, they assume the strict form of 
 law. ‘They are expressed, almost exclusively, 
 in the prohibitory form, because it belongs to 
 law to say what a man shall not do, rather 
 than what he shall do. The Commandments 
 therefore set forth neither of the relations that 
 have been mentioned on the positive side. 
 They contain no injunctions to love God, like 
 that in Deut. vi. 5, x. 12, &c.; nor to love our 
 brethren, like that in Lev. xix. 18; nor do 
 they tell us to Jove our parents, 
 
 1 See on Exod. xx. 12, . 
 
 2 *Queest.in Exod.’ 71. The notion is adopted 
 in the ‘Speculum’ of St Edmund. See p. 337, 
 note 6. , 
 
 3 Philo, ‘de Orac.’ 25 ; ‘Quis rer. div. heres.’ 
 35. Josephus ‘Ant.’ 111. 5, § 8 and §5. Ire- 
 nus, ‘Ady. heres.’ 11. 24, §4. Gregor. Naz. 
 ¢Carm, Var.’ XXXV, 
 
 4 Knobel observes that the subject of the First 
 Table is pietas, that of the Second Table, prodi- 
 tas. 
 
 EXO BUS: eX, 
 
 gv. 
 
 The name most frequently used by Moses 
 for the Decalogue (N)1Y7) signifies something 
 strongly affirmed, literally, something spoken 
 again and again: it is therefore properly 
 rendered in our version THE TESTIMONY 
 (see § I.). Taking this in connection with 
 the prohibitory form of the Commandments, 
 the name must have been understood as the 
 Testimony of Jehovah against the tendency to 
 transgress in those to whom the document. 
 was addressed. When Moses laid up the 
 completed Book of the Law, of which the 
 Commandments were the central point, by 
 the side of the Ark of the Covenant, his de- 
 clared purpose was ‘‘that it may be there for a 
 witness against thee; for I know thy rebellion 
 and thy stiff neck” (Deut. xxxi. 26, 27)°. 
 
 It was by the Law, as it was represeuted in 
 these Commandments, that there came ‘‘ the 
 knowledge of sin®,” ‘The disturbance of the 
 conscience which results from doing wrong, 
 when there is no expressed law, is a vague 
 discomfort to the person with no clear appre- 
 hension as to its cause. But when the voice 
 of the Lord has given forth the Law in words 
 intelligible to the mind, then comes the know- 
 ledge of sin, as the transgression of righteous 
 obligation to a gracious God’, 
 
 And this knowledge of sin necessarily in- 
 volves a consciousness of condemnation. 
 Hence the Tables given to Moses were ‘‘a 
 ministration of condemnation”—*“ a ministra- 
 tion of death written and engraven on stones” 
 (2 Cor, it. 7, 9; cf. Eph. it. 5). Yet was 
 this ministration of condemnation a true reve- 
 lation of Him who had redeemed His people 
 in love, and it is, in the truest sense, a de- 
 mand on them for the tribute of their love®, 
 It is love in the creature which alone can obey 
 the Law in reality and with acceptance®, 
 
 The relation in which the condemning 
 strictness of the Law stood to the forgiving 
 mercy of Jehovah was distinctly shewn in the 
 
 5 Hengstenberg takes nearly the same view 
 as is here given of the application of the word 
 nity, and of the relation of the Mercy seat to 
 the Decalogue. ‘ Pentateuch,’ Vol. 11. p. 524. 
 
 § Rom. ili. 20, vii. 7; cf. note on Ex. xx. 17, 
 
 7 On the mode in which this was figured in 
 the Sacrifices of the Law, see notes on Lev. iv. 
 
 8 “*For though the Law, being love, may 
 seem to reveal God who is love, yet is it rather a 
 demand for love than a revelation of love ; and 
 though it might have been, in the light of high 
 intelligence, and where there was no darkening 
 of sin, concluded that love alone could demand 
 love, yet does the mere demand never so speak 
 to sinners; but ‘by the Law is the knowledge 
 of sin:’ wherefore ‘the Law worketh wrath.’ ” 
 Campbell, ‘The Nature of the Atonement,’ p. 41. 
 Cf. Rom. vii. 7—14. 
 
 8 Matt. xxii. 37—40; Mark xii. 29— 31; Luke 
 x. 26, 27; Rom. xiii. 8, 10; Gal. v.14; Jam, 
 H.'8.. Seé on Ex xxo2, 
 
PO 1 US OGXs 3 
 
 symbolism of the Sanctuary, When the Ta- 
 bles of the Law were deposited in the Ark of 
 the Covenant, they were covered by the Mer- 
 cy seat, which, in accordance with its name, 
 was the sign of the Divine lovingkindness (see 
 Note on ch, xxv. 17), ‘The Cherubim which 
 were on the Mercy seat appear to have figured 
 the highest condition of created intelligence in 
 the act of humble adoration and service, and 
 so to have expressed the condition on which 
 were obtained forgiveness, deliverance from 
 the letter that killeth (2 Cor. iii, 6), and com- 
 munion with Jehovah. ‘This view of the sig- 
 nificance of the Ark and what pertained to it 
 seems aptly to suit the words in which the 
 arrangement of the symbols is_ prescribed; 
 ‘‘and thou shalt put the mercy seat above 
 upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put 
 the testimony that I shall give thee. And 
 there I will meet with thee, and I will com- 
 mune with thee from above the mercy seat, 
 from between the two cherubims which are 
 upon the ark of the testimony,” Ex. xxv, 
 S35) 22. 
 
 The Ark, as the outward and visible sign 
 of the Covenant between Jehovah and His 
 people, thus expressed, in a way suited to the 
 time and the occasion, the Divine purpose in 
 the Atonement. ‘The Law was the charac- 
 teristic feature in the dispensation which was 
 then present; and accordingly the essence of 
 the Law was expressed, not in a symbol, but 
 in plain words written by the finger of God, 
 But the sentence of condemnation implied in 
 the Commandments could not be exhibited in 
 its naked severity as the basis of the Covenant, 
 It was enclosed in the Ark, and over it the 
 Divine mercy was symbolized in such shadowy 
 outline as was to edify the faithful believers 
 
 until the fulness of the time came, when the 
 Son was sent ‘‘whom God hath set forth to 
 be a propitiation (Aaarnpiov, a mercy seat) 
 through faith in his blood, to declare his 
 righteousness for the remission of sins that 
 are past, through the forbearance of God; to 
 declare, I say, at this time His righteousness: 
 that He might be just, and the justifier of him 
 that believeth in Jesus” (Rom, iii, 25, 26). - 
 
 The significance of the whole Sanctuary 
 may be said to be concentrated in the Tables 
 of the Law, and the Mercy seat. The other 
 holy things, with every external arrangement, 
 were subordinated to them?, And hence the 
 place in which they were deposited was the 
 Holy of Holies, closely shut off by the vail, 
 entered by no one but the High-priest, and 
 by him only once in the year, Ex. xl, 20, 21; 
 Lev. xvi, 2, 
 
 § VI. 
 
 It is to be observed that the Decalogue, in 
 respect to its subject-matter, does not set 
 forth what is local, or temporary, or peculiar 
 to a single nation’, Its two Tables are a 
 standing declaration of the true relation be- 
 tween morality and religion for all nations 
 and ages*, The Fourth Commandment is, in 
 its principle, no exception to this®>, The 
 Decalogue belonged to the Israelites, not be- 
 cause the truths expressed in it were exclu- 
 sively theirs, but because it was revealed to 
 them in a special manner (see on Ex, xx. 2). 
 The breadth of meaning which rightly belongs 
 to it may be compared to that of the Lord’s 
 Prayer, which, though it was especially given 
 by Christ to His followers for their own use, 
 contains nothing unsuitable for any believer 
 in One God. 
 
 NOTE on Cuap. xx. wz. 8, 
 
 On THE SABBATH DAy, 
 
 I, The Sabbath according to the Law; II. ac- 
 cording to Tradition. II. Jts connection 
 with the Creation. IV. Its relation to Sun- 
 day. V. Its connection with the deliverance 
 Srom Egypt. V1. Lts compass of meaning. 
 
 § I. 
 That the formal observance of the Sabbath 
 day originated in the Law of Moses appears 
 to have been the opinion of Philo and of most 
 
 1 See Note on ch. xxv. 17. 
 
 2 See Note at the end of ch. xl. § III. 
 
 3 Philo seems to have been impressed with 
 this when he lays an emphasis on the fact that 
 the Ten Commandments were given by Him 
 who was the Father of the Universe (6 watip trév 
 Srwv), the God of the World (Beds xécpov), ‘de 
 decem Orac.’ 9, 10. 
 
 4 ‘*Tt was the boast of Josephus (‘Cont. Ap.’ 
 II. 17), that whereas other legislators had made 
 religion to be a part of virtue, Moses had made 
 
 of the Fathers and Rabbinists®, and is held by 
 many modern critics’, But see note on 
 Gen. ii. 3. 
 
 In what way was the Sabbath day to be 
 kept holy in accordance with the Fourth 
 Commandment? It is expressly said that the 
 ordinary work of life should be intermitted 
 by the whole community, not only the mas- 
 ters, servants, and foreign residents’, but also 
 the cattle; and the period of this intermission 
 
 virtue to be a part of religion.” Stanley, ‘Jewish 
 Church,’ Vol. I. 175. 
 
 5 See Note ‘On the Sabbath day,’ §IV. 
 
 § Philo, ‘de Orac.’ c.. 20, Justin Martyr, 
 ‘Dialog. cum Tryph.’ $19. Irenzeus, IV. 16, 
 Tertullian, ‘Adv. Jud.’ 2, 4. Otho, ‘ Rabb. 
 Lex.’ p. 603. 
 
 7 See Hengst. ‘On the Lord’s Day,’ p. 7; 
 Ewald, ‘ Alterthiim.’ p. 3; ‘ Hist. of Israel,’ 1. 
 576. Hessey, ‘Sunday,’ Lect. Iv., &c. On the 
 word Remember in Ex. xx. 8, see note. 
 
 8 See on Ex, xx. 10. 
 
 Y2 
 
 a0 
 
40 
 
 was from the evening of the sixth day of the 
 week to the evening of the seventh!, ‘The 
 following occupations are expressly mentioned 
 as unlawful in different parts of the Old 
 ‘Testament ; sowing and reaping (Ex. xxxiv. 
 21), pressing grapes, and bearing burdens of 
 all kinds (Neh. xii, 15; Jer. xvii. 21), holding 
 of markets and all kinds of trade (Neh. xiii, 
 15; Amos vill. 5), gathering wood, and kin- 
 dling a fire for cooking (Ex, xxxv. 3; Num. 
 xv. 32). The Sabbath was to be a day of 
 enjoyment like other festivals (Isa, lviii, 13; 
 Hos, ii. 11), and such restrictions as were 
 imposed could have been unacceptable to 
 none but the disobedient and the avaricious, 
 such as are spoken of in Amos viii. 5, 6. 
 
 In the service of the Sanctuary, the Morn- 
 ing and Evening Sacrifices were doubled?, the 
 Shewbread was changed’, and, after the 
 courses of the Priests and Levites had been 
 instituted by David, each course in its turn 
 commenced its duties on the Sabbath day‘. 
 When the Temple was built, there is reason 
 to believe that there was a special musical ser-: 
 vice for the day®. 
 
 The term Holy Convocation, which belongs 
 to the Sabbath day in common with certain 
 other Festival days, would seem to imply that 
 there was a meeting together of the people for 
 a religious purpose’, From the mode in 
 which the commands to keep the Sabbath day 
 and to reverence the Sanctuary are associated, 
 it may be inferred with probability that there 
 was such a meeting in the Court of the Sanc- 
 tuary’. At later periods, in places remote 
 from the Temple, we know that it was a cus- 
 tom to resort on this day to public teachers, 
 and to hear the reading of the Old Testament, 
 with addresses of exposition and exhortation, 
 in the Synagogues®. It is not unreasonable to 
 suppose that some usage of this kind may 
 have been observed at the Sanctuary itself 
 from the first institution of the Sabbath®, 
 
 * See Lev. xxi. 32. 
 2 Num. xxviii. g; 2 Chro. xxxi. 3; Ezek. xlvi. 
 
 3 Lev. xxiv. 8; 1 Chro. ix. 32; Matt. xii. 4, 
 &e. 
 ae 3d. S's 9 'Chro. xxiii, 23%, aiChro. 
 isnt? 
 
 5 This is favoured by a comparison of the 
 heading of Ps. Ixxxi. with v. 3 of the Psalm 
 itself, as well as by the Talmud. 
 
 6 Lev. xxiii. 2, 3. 
 
 ? Lev. xix. 30; Ezek. xxiii. 38. 
 
 8 2K. iv. 23; Luke iv. 15, 16; Acts xiii. 14, 
 Thi 27, 4V,52 bs 
 
 9 There may be references to such a custom 
 Lev. x. 113 Deut. xxxiii. 10. The earliest and 
 best Jewish traditions state that one great object 
 of the Sabbath day was to furnish means and 
 opportunity for spiritual edification. Philo, ‘de 
 Ord.” Cc. 20," ay ie eos. iil. 27.) Jos, “Ant.” 
 XVI. 2. § 3. Cont. Ap.’ I. 20, 11. 18. For rab- 
 binical authorities to the same effect, see Cart- 
 wright on Ex. xx. 8, in the ‘ Critici Sacri.” 
 
 EPO) DCIS SATS 
 
 Such are the particulars that can be gather- 
 ed out of the Scriptures as to the mode of 
 observing the Sabbath day. In the time of 
 the Legislator an entire rest from the work 
 of daily life was to reign throughout the 
 Camp: and it may be conjectured that the 
 people assembled before the Altar at the hours 
 of the Morning and Evening Sacrifices for 
 prayer and contemplation, and to listen to the 
 reading of portions of the Divine Law, per- 
 haps from the lips of Moses himself, 
 
 The notices of the Sabbath day in the Pro- 
 phets are most frequently accompanied by 
 complaint or warning respecting its neglect 
 and desecration’, But in the time of Isaiah 
 (i. 13) a parade of observing it had become a 
 cloak for hypocrisy, probably under a kindred 
 influence to that which turned the public fasts 
 into occasions for strife and debate (Isa. lviii. 
 4). These diverse abuses may have co-existed 
 as belonging to two opposite parties in the 
 community, both being in the wrong. 
 
 § IL. 
 
 In another age, after the Captivity, the 
 Pharisees multiplied the restraints of the Sab- 
 bath day to a most burdensome extent. It 
 was forbidden to pluck an ear of corn and 
 rub out the grains to satisfy hunger in passing 
 through a cornfield (Matt. xii. 2); or to re- 
 lieve the sick (Matt. xii. 10; Luke xiii. 14). 
 It was however permitted to lead an ox or an 
 ass to water, or to lift out an animal that had 
 fallen into a pit (Matt. xii. rr; Luke xiv. 5), 
 to administer circumcision, if the eighth day 
 
 . after the birth of a child fell on a Sabbath 
 
 (Joh. vii, 22), and to invite guests to a social 
 meal (Luke xiv. 1). According to rabbinical 
 authorities, it was forbidden to travel more 
 than 2000 cubits on the Sabbath", to kill the 
 most offensive kinds of vermin, to write two 
 letters of the alphabet, to use a wooden leg or 
 a crutch, to carry a purse, or, for a woman, 
 to carry a seal-ring or a smelling bottle, to 
 wear a high head-dress or a false tooth. 
 Amongst other restraints laid upon animals, 
 the fat-tailed sheep was not allowed to use the 
 little truck on which the tail was borne to 
 save the animal from suffering. ‘These are a 
 portion of 39 prohibitions of the same kind”. 
 
 10 Ts. lvi. 2—6, lviii. 13; Jer. xvii. 21, 27; 
 Ezek. xx. 13, 16, 20; Amos viii. 8, &c. 
 
 11 On the Sabbath-day’s journey, see Joseph. 
 ‘Ant.’ xi. 8. § 4 with the Note on Ex. xvi. 
 29: also Walther, ‘de Itin. Sabb.’ in ‘ Thes. 
 Philolog.’ II. p. 417. Winer, ‘R. B.’ s. ‘ Sab- 
 bathsweg.’ 
 
 12 Mishna, ‘de Sabbatho.’ We are told by 
 a eulogist of the Talmud that the rabbinical 
 Sabbath was not “a thing of grim austerity” 
 (‘Quarterly Rev.’ Dec. 1867.) Its austerity was 
 indeed somewhat mitigated by qualifying regula- 
 tions. ‘Though the Jew could not light a fire on 
 the Sabbath, he was formally permitted, at the 
 latest moment of the eve of the Sabbath, to pack 
 
Bec DOS) xX, 2 
 
 Connected with this trifling of the Pharisees 
 and the Rabbinists, is the notion that the in- 
 tention of the Law was, that the Sabbath 
 should be, as nearly as possible, a day of mere 
 inaction. ‘This has been held not only by 
 Jewish writers!, but by some Christians in 
 the time of S. Chrysostom?, and by critics of 
 more modern date (Spencer, Vitringa, Le Clerc). 
 Our Lord decides this very point by declaring 
 that there is a kind of work which is proper 
 for the Sabbath. day*. See the next section. 
 
 ; § III. 
 
 In examining the two distinct grounds for 
 the observance of the Sabbath day which 
 are assigned by Moses‘, the first step is to 
 trace the nature of the connection between 
 the Day and the Creation of the world. 
 What is clearly stated is, that the Day was 
 hallowed by the Divine Law as a memorial 
 of the rest of God when the Creation of the 
 world was completed’. Man was to rest be- 
 cause God had rested. But the rest of man 
 can only partially resemble the rest of God. 
 ‘The Creator of the ends of the earth faint- 
 eth not, neither is weary®,” His work in the 
 world did not cease at the close of the six 
 days, nor has it ever been remitted since’. 
 His hand must be ever holding the corners of 
 the earth and the strength of the hills*. His 
 rest cannot therefore be like that inaction 
 which belongs to night and sleep, which man, 
 in common with all animals, requires for the 
 restoration of his wasted powers. But yet a 
 man may have conscious experience, after well 
 performed work, of a restful condition that 
 bears an analogy to the occasion on which 
 ‘God saw every thing that He had made, 
 and, behold, it was very good®.” And this 
 Sabbath feeling is only to be enjoyed by those 
 whose work, performed in a spirit of trustful 
 dependence, has kept pace with the day during 
 the week; those who obey not only the com- 
 mand, ‘‘Remember the Sabbath day,” but 
 also the command, ‘Six days shalt thou la- 
 bour™.” 
 
 up hot food in such a way as to keep it hot as 
 long as possible (‘de Sabb.’ Iv. 1, 2). Under 
 particular conditions, the sick might be relieved 
 (Mish, ‘Joma,’ vi11. 6). Fasting on the Sabbath 
 was strictly prohibited (Otho, ‘ Rab. Lex.’ p. 608 ; 
 cf. Judith viii. 6). Whether or not a Sabbath re- 
 gulated by rabbinical rules was, on the whole, 
 grimly austere, we need not scruple to call the 
 rules themselves grossly absurd. 
 
 1 Buxtorf. ‘Synag. Jud.’ CXxvI. 
 
 2 «Hom. in Matt.’ XxxI. 
 
 3 Matt. xii. 12 ; Mark iii. 4, &c. 
 
 4 See Ex. xx. 11; Deut. v. 15; Note ‘On 
 the Ten Commandments,’ § IT. 
 
 Seiex, ox 11, <xmi. 17, Cf Get. 11.3; 
 
 euis, xi. 28. 
 
 7 See John v. 17. 
 
 Piers, Xcv. 4, 5. 
 
 9 Gen. i. 31. 
 
 10 Moses (says Philo) éxéXevoev rods wéANovTas 
 
 9 
 
 The true rest of man then is so far like the 
 rest of the Creator, that it is remote in its 
 nature from the sleep of insensibility as it is 
 from the ordinary struggle of the world. The 
 weekly Sabbath, as representing that state, 
 was ‘‘a shadow of things to come!!,” a fore 
 taste of the life in which there is to be no 
 more foilsome fatigue (novos), that life which 
 is the true keeping of Sabbath (caPBBariopds) 
 into which our Saviour entered as our fore- 
 runner when He ceased from His works on 
 earth, as God had ceased from His works on 
 the seventh day (Heb, iv. 9, ro). 
 
 The works of the Creation are described 
 as culminating in the creation of man. The 
 Sabbath crowned the completed works, and 
 as it was revealed to the Israelite, it reminded 
 him of ‘‘the fact of his relation to God, of 
 his being made in the image of God; it was 
 to teach him to regard the universe not chiefly 
 as under the government of sun or moon, or 
 as regulated by their courses; but as an order 
 which the unseen God had created, which in- 
 cluded Sun, Moon, Stars, Earth, and all the 
 living creatures that inhabit them. The 
 week, then, was especially to raise the Jew 
 above the thought of ‘Time, to make him feel 
 that though he was subject to ts laws, he yet 
 stood in direct connection with an eternal 
 law; with a Being who is, and was, and is to 
 come?’,” Philo aptly calls the day the imag- 
 ing forth (éxpayeiov) of the first beginning. 
 Some of the wisest Jewish teachers (Aben- 
 Ezra, Abarbanel) have said that he who 
 breaks the Sabbath denies the Creation, ‘The 
 Sabbath, in this connection, became to the 
 Israelite the central point of religious observ- 
 ance, and represented every appropriation of 
 time to the public recognition of Jehovah, 
 Hence the injunction to observe it appears to 
 be essentially connected with the warning 
 against idolatry }’. 
 
 § IV, 
 
 But this great idea did not exclusively be- 
 long to the Israelite, although it was revealed 
 to him, above all men, in its true relation to 
 God and man, Real worship for every man, 
 always and everywhere, is of course based on 
 the truth of a Creator distinct from the Crea- 
 tion. And thus the Law of the Sabbath was 
 the expression of a universal truth, Hence, the 
 Commandment bears its meaning for all man- 
 kind. ‘The day which we observe, in accord- 
 ance with ecclesiastical usage, holds another 
 place in the week, and its connection with 
 
 év ratty Shv TH wodwrelg, Kabdaep ev Tols adXoLs, 
 kal xara Tov0’ érecOar Oe@, mpos mev Epya TpeE- 
 momévous ep’ juepas &f, dvéxovras 6 Kal pidogo- 
 poovras TH EBddun Kal Oewplars wev TAY THS PiTEws 
 cxordfovras, K.T.A. ‘de decem Orac.’ c. 20. 
 
 1 Col. ii. 16, 17. 
 
 oe CER eV, XIV. 13. 
 
 13 Maurice ‘On the Old Testament,’ Serm, I. 
 
 14 See Lev. xix, 3. 43; Ezek. xx. 16, 20. 
 
 41 
 
a 
 e) 
 
 42 
 
 the Creation of the world has thus been put 
 into the background, But the meaning of 
 the Lord’s day cannot be separated from the 
 great meaning of the Sabbath. As the Sab- 
 bath reminded the believer under the Old 
 Covenant that God had rested after He had 
 created man and breathed into him the breath 
 of life before sin had brought death into the 
 world, so the Sunday now reminds the be- 
 liever that Christ rested after He had over- 
 come death, that he might restore all who 
 believe in Him to a new life, that they may 
 become the sons of God by adoption!. What 
 therefore the Sunday, as a commemoration of 
 the Resurrection, is to the dispensation of 
 Christ, the Sabbath, in respect to its connec- 
 tion with the rest of God, was to the dispen- 
 tion of Moses. On this ground then there is 
 reason enough why the Fourth, as well as 
 the other Commandments, should be address- 
 ed to Christian congregations and should hold 
 its place in our Service. 
 
 § V. 
 
 It was at a later period that the inspired 
 Legislator set forth a second ground on which 
 obedience to the Commandment was required. 
 It was said to the Israelite that he should ob- 
 serve the Day in order that his manservant 
 and his maidservant might rest as well as he; 
 and the words were added; ‘‘ and remember 
 that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, 
 and that the Lorp thy God brought thee out 
 thence through a mighty hand and a stretched 
 out arm: therefore the Lorp thy God com- 
 manded thee to keep the Sabbath day?.” By 
 the command that the manservants and the 
 maidservants were to rest on the Day as well 
 as their masters, witness was borne to the 
 equal position which every Israelite might 
 claim in the presence of Jehovah. The Sab- 
 bath was thus made a distinguishing badge, 
 a sacramental bond, for the whole people, ac- 
 cording to the words, ‘‘it is a sign between 
 me and you throughout your generations; 
 that. ye may know that I am the Lorp that 
 doth sanctity you3.” ‘The wealthy Israelite, 
 in remembrance of what he himself, or his 
 forefathers, had suffered in Egypt, was to 
 realize the fact on this Day that the poorest 
 of his brethren had enjoyed the same deliver- 
 ances, and had the same share in the Co- 
 venant, as himself. ‘The whole nation, as one 
 man, was to enjoy rest. He who outraged 
 the Sabbath, either by working himself, or by 
 
 1 Rom. iv: 25, vi. 4, viii. 13, 15. 
 
 2 Deut. v. 14, 15. 
 
 Six xeKeetnmes ct. J.ey..xx, 83 Is, lyi, 2, 
 43; Ezek, xx..12. 20, xxii, 8, 26. 
 
 EXODUS. XX. 
 
 suffering his servants to work, broke the Co- 
 venant with Jehovah, and at the same time 
 cut himself off from his people so as to incur 
 the sentence of death*, 
 
 This latter ground for the observance of 
 the Sabbath day furnishes a not less strict an- 
 alogy with the Sunday than that which has 
 been noticed. What the Sabbath was to 
 ‘‘the kingdom of priests, the holy nation,” 
 on the score that they had been redeemed 
 from the bondage of Egypt and made free 
 men, such the Sunday is to ‘‘ the chosen gene- 
 ration, the royal priesthood, the holy nation, 
 the peculiar people®,” as those whom Christ 
 has redeemed from the bondage of corruption, 
 and brought into the glorious liberty of the 
 children of God?. 
 
 § VI. 
 
 In order rightly to apprehend the compass 
 of the Fourth Commandment in reference to 
 the public worship of the Israelites, it should 
 be kept in view that the Sabbath did not 
 stand by itself, as an insulated observance. 
 Not only did the original ground of the 
 Weekly Sabbath connect it with all true wor- 
 ship, but it formed the centre of an organ- 
 ized system including the Sabbatical year, and 
 the Jubilee year’. Besides this, the recur- 
 rence of the Sabbatical number in the cycle 
 of yearly festivals is so frequent and distinct, 
 as plainly to indicate a set purpose. Without 
 laying stress on the mystical meaning of the 
 number seven, as Philo, Bahr, and others 
 have done, it is evident that the number was 
 the Divinely appointed symbol, repeated again 
 and again in the public services, suggesting 
 the connection between the entire range of the 
 Ceremonial Law and the consecrated Seventh 
 Day. And this may be compared with the 
 important remark of Bihr, that the ritual of 
 the Sabbath day, in spite of the superlative 
 sanctity of the Day, was not, like that of 
 other Festivals, distinguished by offerings or 
 rites of a peculiar kind, but only by a dou- 
 bling of the common daily sacrifices. It was 
 thus not so much cut off from the Week as 
 marked out as the Day of Days, and so sym- 
 bolized the sanctification of the daily life of 
 the people. In whichever way we regard it, 
 the Fourth Commandment appears to have 
 stood to the Israelite as an injunction in the 
 broadest sense to maintain the national Wor- 
 ship of Jehovah. 
 
 4 Ex, xxxi. 14, IS —xxxv. 2; Jer. xvii. 21—27. 
 5 Ex. xix. 6, 
 
 6 1 Pet. i. 9. 
 
 7 Rom. viii. 21. 
 
 8 Lev. xxv. 
 
: 
 
 Vv. 22—1.] 
 
 22 § And the Lorp said unto 
 Moses, Thus thou shalt say unto the 
 children of Israel, Ye have seen 
 that I have talked with you from 
 heaven. 
 
 23 Ye shall not make with me 
 gods of silver, neither shall ye make 
 unto you gods of gold. 
 
 24 9 An altar of earth thou shalt 
 make unto me, and shalt sacrifice 
 thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy 
 peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine 
 oxen: in all places where I record my 
 
 Deut. 27, name I will come unto thee, and I 
 
 fosh, 8.3t. will bless thee. 
 
 eb. 
 rela there 
 vith hew- 
 
 25 And /if thou wilt make me an 
 altar of stone, thou shalt not * build 
 
 THE Book OF THE COVENANT. 
 Ch. xx, 22—Xxlil, 33. 
 Introductory Note. 
 
 Now follows a series of laws, some of 
 them addressed simply to the conscience, like 
 the Ten Commandments, and others having 
 the sanction of a penalty attached, ‘The con- 
 text seems to make it clear that we may iden- 
 tify this series with what was written by 
 Moses in the book called the BOOK OF THE 
 COVENANT, and read by him in the audience 
 of the people (see xxiv. 4, 7). There has 
 been a difference of opinion as to the compass 
 of matter contained in this Book. But the 
 weight of authority is in favour of its com- 
 prising the last five verses of ch, xx, with 
 chaps, xxi, xxii, xxiii (de Wette, Ewald, 
 Hupfeld, Knobel, Keil, Herxheimer, &c.), 
 A few would add the Ten Commandments 
 (Hengst., Kurtz, &c.), Some Jewish Com- 
 mentators imagine that the BoOK OF THE 
 COVENANT included very considerable por- 
 tions of Genesis and of the earlier part of 
 Exodus, 
 
 Adopting the conclusion as by far the most 
 probable one, that the Book of the Cove- 
 nant included from ch, xx. 22 to xxiii, 33, it 
 is evident that the document cannot be re- 
 garded as a strictly systematic whole, Por- 
 tions of it were probably traditional rules 
 handed down from the Patriarchs, and re- 
 tained by the Israelites in Egypt. Probable 
 traces of pre-Mosaic antiquity may be seen in 
 XX, 24—26, xxi, 6, xxili, 19, &c, Some of 
 the laws relate to habits of fixed abode, not 
 (at least if taken in their strict form) to such 
 4 mode of life as that of the Israelites in their 
 march through the Wilderness (see xxii. 5, 6, 
 29, xxiii, 10, 11): some, especially those re- 
 lating. to slavery, would seem to have been 
 modifications of ancient usages (see on xxi, 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 RO Pes. Ls » 
 
 it of hewn stone: for if thou lift - 
 up thy tool upon it, thou hast pol- 
 luted it. 3 
 
 26 Neither shalt thou go up by 
 steps unto mine altar, that thy naked- 
 ness be not discovered thereon. 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 t Laws for menservants. 5 For the servant 
 whose car ts bored. ‘7 For womenservants. 
 12 For manslaughter. 16 For stealers of 
 men. 17 For cursers of parents, 18 For 
 smiters. 22 Fora hurt by chance. 28 for 
 an ox that goreth. 33 For him that is an 
 occasion of harm. 
 
 OW these are the judgments 
 | ‘ which thou shalt set before 
 them. 
 
 20, 21). ‘These more or less ancient maxims 
 may have been associated with notes of such 
 decisions on cases of difference as had been up 
 to this time pronounced by Moses and _ the 
 judges whom he had appointed by the advice 
 of Jethro. See xvili, 13—26. 
 
 In whatever way these laws may have ori- 
 ginated, as they are here brought together, 
 they are clearly enforced by Jehovah as con- 
 ditions of conduct for the covenanted people. 
 The adoption of Patriarchal maxims accords 
 with the spirit of the Mosaic legislation, as 
 expressed in the Fifth Commandment, 
 
 Cuap. XX. 22—26. Nothing could be 
 more appropriate as the commencement of the 
 Book of the Covenant than these regulations 
 for public worship. 
 
 23. Assuming this to be an old formula, 
 its meaning is brought out more compre~ 
 hensively in the Second Commandment, and 
 is strengthened by the fact declared in wv, 225 
 that Jehovah had now spoken from Heaven. 
 
 24-26, ‘These must have been old and 
 accepted rules for the building of altars, and 
 they are not inconsistent with the directions 
 for the construction of the Altar of the 
 Court of the Tabernacle, ch, xxvii, 1—8. 
 There is no good reason to doubt that they 
 were observed in ‘the Brazen Altar,” as it is 
 called, although no reference is made to them 
 in connection with it, ‘That Altar, according 
 to the directions that are given, must indeed 
 have been rather az altar case, with a mass of 
 earth or stone within, when it was put to use. 
 See notes on xxvii, r—8, and cf. Josh, xxi. 
 26—28. 
 
 Cuap. XXI. 
 continued. 
 
 1. judgments] i.e. decisions of the Law. It 
 is worthy of remark that these judgments 
 
 The Book of the Covenant, 
 
 43 
 
EXODUS! XOOL 
 
 ear through with an aul; and he shall 
 serve him for ever. 
 7 4 And if a man sell his daugh- 
 
 ter to be a maidservant, she shall not 
 
 [v. 2—11. 
 
 344 
 
 @ Lev. 25. 
 I 
 
 ° 2 “If thou buy an Hebrew ser- 
 Deut. x3. vant, six years he shall serve: and in 
 Jer. 34. 14, the seventh he shall go out free for 
 nothing. 
 
 tHeb. 3 If he came in ‘by himself, he go out as the menservants do. 
 
 body. shall go out by himself: if he were 8 If she ‘please not her master, an 
 married, then his wife shall go out who hath betrothed her to himself, te eyeso/ 
 with him. then shall he let her be redeemed: to °* 
 
 4 If his master have given him a_ sell her unto a strange nation he shall 
 
 wife, and she have born him sons or have no power, seeing he hath dealt 
 daughters; the wife and her children  deceitfully with her. 
 shall be her master’s, and he shall go g And if he have betrothed her 
 out by himself. unto his son, he shall deal with her 
 
 t Heb. 5 And if the servant ‘shall plainly after the manner of daughters. 
 
 aa) cay. say, I love my master, my wife, and 10 If he take him another wife ; 
 
 my children; I will not go out free: 
 6 Then his master shall bring him 
 unto the judges; he shall also bring 
 him to the door, or unto the door 
 post; and his master shall bore his 
 
 — 
 
 begin with some that relate to slavery (vv. 
 2—16); other judgments on the same subject 
 occur In vv, 20, 21, 26, 27. 
 
 2. A Hebrew might be sold as a bond- 
 man in consequence either of debt (Lev. xxv. 
 39) or of the commission of theft (Ex. xxii. 
 3). But his servitude could not be enforced 
 for more than six full years. The law is 
 more fully expressed in Deut. xv. 12—18, 
 where it enjoins that the bondman should 
 not be sent away at the end of his period of 
 service without a liberal supply of provisions; 
 and it is further supplemented by other regu- 
 lations, especially in reference to the Jubilee, 
 in Lev. xxv. 39—43, 47—55. Foreign slaves 
 are expressly spoken of Ley. xxv. 44, 46. 
 
 3. Ifa married man became a bondman, 
 his rights in regard to his wife were respected: 
 but if a single bondman accepted at the hand 
 of his master a bondwoman as his wife, the 
 master did not lose his claim to the woman, 
 or her children, at the expiration of the hus- 
 band’s term of service. Such wives, it may 
 be presumed, were always foreign slaves. 
 
 5, 6. But if the bondman loved his wife 
 so as to be unwilling to give her up, or if he 
 was strongly enough attached to his master’s 
 service, he might, by submitting to a certain 
 ceremony, prolong his term ‘for ever;” that 
 is, most probably, till the next Jubilee, when 
 every Hebrew was set free. So Josephus 
 (‘ Ant.’ Iv. 8, § 28) and the Rabbinists un- 
 derstood the phrase. See Lev. xxv. 40, 50. 
 The custom of boring the ear as a mark of 
 Slavery appears to have been a common one 
 in ancient times, observed in many nations. 
 See Xenoph, ‘Anab.’ 111, 1, § 31; Plaut, 
 
 her food, her raiment, and her duty 
 of marriage, shall he not diminish. 
 
 11 And if he do not these three 
 unto her, then shall she go out free 
 without money. 
 
 ‘Poenul,’ v. ii, 21; 
 ‘ Cicero,’ c. 26, &c. 
 
 6. unto the judges] Literally, before the 
 gods (elobim). The word does not denote 
 judges in a direct way, but it is to be under- 
 stood as the name of God, in its ordinary 
 plural form, God being the source of all 
 justice. (So Gesen., de Wette, Knobel, 
 First, Herxh., &c.) LXX. mpds 76 Kpernprov 
 Tov Oceov. ‘The name in this connection 
 always has the definite article prefixed, See 
 Xxli. 8, 9, &c. 
 
 7. A man might, in accordance with ex- 
 isting custom, sell his daughter to another 
 man with a view to her becoming an inferior 
 wife, or concubine. In this case, she was not 
 ‘‘to go out,” like the bondman; that is, she 
 was not to be dismissed at the end of the 
 sixth year. But women who were bound in 
 any other way, would appear to have been 
 under the same conditions as bondmen. See 
 Deut xvi 7%, 
 
 8. shall he let her be redeemed] More 
 strictly, he shall cause her to be re- 
 deemed. ‘The meaning seems to be that he 
 should either return her to her father as set 
 free, or find another Hebrew master for her 
 who would grant her the same privileges as 
 she would have had if she had remained with 
 himself. ‘The latter sentence of the verse ap- 
 pears to signify that, although he was not 
 forced to keep literal faith with the woman 
 by making her his concubine, he was not per- 
 mitted to sell her to a foreigner. Even in 
 the case of a foreign captive who had been 
 accepted as a concubine, and had displeased 
 her master, she could not be sold as a slave, 
 
 Juvenal, I. 104; Plut. 
 
v. 12 —20.] 
 
 12 4 *He that smiteth a man, so 
 that he die, shall be surely put to death. 
 
 13 And if a man lie not in wait, 
 but God deliver him into his hand; 
 then “I will appoint thee a place whi- 
 ther he shall flee. 
 
 14 But if a man come presump- 
 tuously upon his neighbour, to slay 
 him with guile; thou shalt take him 
 from mine altar, that he may die. 
 
 15 “1 And he that smiteth his fa- 
 ther, or his mother, shall be surely 
 put to death. 
 
 16 4 And he that stealeth a man, 
 and selleth him, or if he be found 
 in his hand, he shall surely be put 
 to death. 
 
 Deut. 19. 
 
 but was entitled to her freedom. See Deut. 
 Vesa a 
 
 11. if he do not these three unto her| Most 
 commentators refer these three things to the 
 food, raiment, and duty of marriage, men- 
 tioned in v, 10. But Knobel and others pre- 
 fer the interpretation of most of the Rabbin- 
 ists, which seems on the whole best to suit 
 the context, that the words express a choice 
 of one of three things, in which case their 
 sense is, if he do neither of these three things. 
 The man was to give the woman, whom he 
 had purchased from her father, her freedom, 
 unless (i) he caused her to be redeemed by a 
 Hebrew master (v. 8); or, (ii) gave her to 
 his son, and treated her as a daughter (v. 9); 
 or, (iii) in the event of his taking another 
 wife (v. 10), unless he allowed her to retain 
 her place and privileges. ‘These rules (vv. 
 7—11) are to be regarded as mitigations of 
 the then existing usages of concubinage. ‘The 
 form in which they are expressed confirms 
 this view. 
 
 12. No distinction is expressly made here 
 or elsewhere between the murder of a free 
 man and that of a bondman. See on w. 20. 
 The law was afterwards expressly declared to 
 relate also to foreigners, Lev. xxiv. 17, 21, 22; 
 cf. Gen. ix. 6. 
 
 ‘13, 14. There was no place of safety for 
 the guilty murderer, not even the Altar of 
 Jehovah, ‘Thus all superstitious notions con- 
 nected with the right of sanctuary were ex- 
 cluded. Adonijah and Joab appear to have 
 vainly trusted that the vulgar feeling would 
 protect them, if they took hold of. the horns 
 of the Altar on which atonement with blood 
 was made (1 K. i. 50, il. 28; Lev. iv. 7). 
 But for one who killed a man ‘‘ at unawares,” 
 that is, without intending to do it, the Law 
 afterwards appointed places. of refuge, Num. 
 
 HROD US! SOx Is 
 
 345 
 17 @ And “he that 'curseth his ¢@ Lev. 20. 
 
 father, or his mother, shall surely be Sagan 
 put to death. M 
 
 j ” Matt. I5 
 18 @ And if men strive together, Stark, 
 : ‘ Io 
 and one smite ' another with a stone, | Or, 
 vrevileth. 
 
 or with Ais fist, and he die not, but 16: 
 keepeth /is bed: 
 
 19 If he rise again, and walk a- 
 broad upon his staff, then shall he 
 that smote him be quit: only he 
 shall pay for ‘the loss of his time, tHe». 
 
 and shall cause him to be thoroughly Hip pei? 
 
 healed. 
 
 20 4 And if a man smite his ser- 
 vant, or his maid, with a rod, and he 
 die under his hand; he shall be surel 
 ' punished. 
 
 his neigh- 
 bour. 
 
 y t Heb. 
 
 avenged: 
 
 xxxv, 6—34; Deut. iv. 41—43, xix. 2—10; 
 Josh, xx. 2—g. It is very probable that 
 there was some provision answering to the 
 Cities of Refuge, that may have been based 
 upon old usage, in the Camp in the Wil- 
 derness. 
 
 15, 16,17. ‘The following offences were 
 to be punished with death :— 
 
 Striking a parent, cf. Deut. xxvii. 16. 
 
 Cursing a parent, cf. Lev. xx. 9. 
 
 Kidnapping, whether with a view to retain 
 the person stolen, or to sell him, cf. Deut. 
 XXIV. 7. 
 
 18, 19. If one man injured another in a 
 quarrel so as to oblige him to keep his bed, 
 he who had inflicted the injury was set free 
 from the liability to a criminal charge (such 
 as might be based upon v. 12) when the in- 
 jured man had so far recovered as to be able 
 to walk with a staff: but he was required to 
 compensate the latter for the loss of his time 
 until his recovery was complete, and for the 
 
 cost of his healing. 
 
 20, 21. ‘The Jewish authorities appear 
 to be right in referring this law, like those 
 in vv. 26, 27, 32, to foreign slaves (see Lev. 
 xxv. 44——46). All Hebrew bondmen were 
 treated, in regard to life and limb, like free- 
 men, and the Law would take this for grant- 
 ed. ‘The master was permitted to retain the 
 power of chastising his alien slave with a rod, 
 but the indulgence of unbridled temper was 
 so far kept in check by his incurring punish- 
 ment if the slave died under his hand. If 
 however the slave survived the castigation a 
 day or two, it was assumed that the offence 
 of the master had not been so heinous, and he 
 did not become amenable to the law, because 
 the loss of the slave who, by old custom, 
 was recognized as his property, was account- 
 ed,.under the circumstances, as a punish- 
 
346 
 
 21 Notwithstanding, if he continue 
 a day or two, he shall not be punish- 
 ed: for he zs his money. 
 
 22, 4 If men strive, and hurt a 
 woman with child, so that her fruit 
 depart from her, and yet no mischief 
 follow: he shall be surely punished, 
 according as the woman’s husband 
 will lay upon him; and he shall pay 
 as the judges determine. 
 
 23 And if any mischief follow, then 
 thou shalt give life for life, 
 
 24 °Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, 
 hand for hand, foot for foot, 
 
 25 Burning for burning, wound for 
 wound, stripe for stripe. 
 
 26 4 And if a man smite the eye 
 of his servant, or the eye of his maid, 
 that it perish; he shall let him go free 
 for his eye’s sake. 
 
 27 And if he smite out his man- 
 servant’s tooth, or his maidservant’s 
 
 ment. It is not said how the master was to 
 be treated in the event of the immediate death 
 of the slave. It may have been left to the deci- 
 sion of the judges as to whether the case should 
 come under the law of v.12, or some second- 
 ary punishment should be inflicted. — ‘The 
 protection here afforded to the life of a slave 
 may seem to us but a slight one; but it is the 
 very earliest trace of such protection in legis- 
 lation, and it stands in strong and favourable 
 contrast with the old laws of Greece, Rome, 
 and other nations. ‘The same may be said of 
 vv. 26, 27, 32. These regulations were most 
 likely, as much as was feasible at the time, to 
 mitigate the cruelty of ancient practice; they 
 were as much as the hardness of the hearts of 
 the people would bear, Matt. xix. 8. See 
 Mr Goldwin Smith’s admirable essay, ‘¢ Does 
 the Bible sanction American Slavery?” 
 
 22—25. The sense is rather obscure. 
 The rule would seem to refer to a case in 
 which the wife of a man engaged in a quarrel 
 interfered. If the violence did no more than 
 occasion premature birth, he who inflicted it 
 was punished by a fine to be proposed by the 
 husband, and approved by the magistrates, 
 But if the injury was more serious, so as to 
 affect life or limb, a penalty was to be inflict- 
 ed in accordance with the law of suffering 
 like for like, the jus talionis.—This law is re- 
 peated in substance, Lev. xxiv. 19, 20, 213 
 Deut. xix. 21; cp. Gen. ix. 6. It has its root 
 in a simple conception of justice, and is found 
 in the laws of many ancient nations. It was 
 ascribed to Rhadamanthus (Arist. ‘ Ethic.’ v, 
 
 ExOD US ee 
 
 [v. 21—31v 
 
 tooth; he shall let him go free for his 
 tooth’s sake. 
 28 4 If an ox gore a man or a 
 
 ; 
 
 woman, that they die: then /the ox/Gen.o5. 
 
 shall be surely stoned, and his flesh 
 shall not be eaten; but the owner of 
 the ox shall be quit. 
 
 29 But if the ox were wont to 
 push with his horn in time past, and 
 it hath been testified to his owner, 
 and he hath not kept him in, but 
 that he hath killed a man or a wo- 
 man; the ox shall be stoned, and_ his 
 owner also shall be put to death. 
 
 30 If there be laid on him a sum 
 of money, then he shall give for the 
 ransom of his life whatsoever is laid 
 upon him. 
 
 31 Whether he have gored a son, 
 or have gored a daughter, according ° 
 
 to this judgment shall it be done unto - 
 
 him. 
 
 5). It was recognized in the laws of Solon 
 (Diog. Laert, I. 57), in the Laws of the 
 Twelve Tables (Aul. Gell. x. 1; Festus, s, 
 talio), by the ancient Indians (Strab. xv. p. 
 710), and by the Thurians (Diod. Sic. xIt, 
 17). It appears to be regarded in this place 
 as a maxim for the magistrate in awarding 
 the amount of compensation to be paid for 
 the infliction of personal injury. The sum 
 was to be as nearly as possible the worth in 
 money of the power lost by the injured per- 
 son. ‘This view appears to be in accordance 
 with Jewish tradition (Mishna, ‘ Baba Kama,’ 
 vill. 1). Michaelis has some good remarks 
 on the jus talionis (‘ Laws of Moses,’ Vol. 111, 
 p- 448).— Our Lord quotes v. 24 as represent- 
 ing the form of the Law, in order to illustrate 
 the distinction between the Letter and the 
 Spirit (Matt. v. 38). The tendency of the 
 teaching of the Scribes and Pharisees was to 
 confound the obligations of the conscience 
 with the external requirements of the Law. 
 ‘The Law, in its place, was still to be ‘ holy 
 and just and good,” but its direct purpose 
 was to protect the community, not to guide 
 the heart of the believer, who was not to exact 
 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, but to love his 
 enemies, and to forgive all injuries. 
 
 26, 27. When a master inflicted a per- 
 manent injury on the person of his bondser- 
 vant, freedom was the proper equivalent for 
 the disabled or lost member. 
 
 28—31. If an ox killed a person, the ani- 
 mal was slain as a tribute to the sanctity of 
 human life (Gen, ix. 6; cf, Gen, iv. 11). It 
 
Vv. 32—4. | 
 
 32 If the ox shall push a man- 
 servant or a maidservant; he shall 
 give unto their master thirty shekels 
 of silver, and the ox shall be stoned. 
 
 33 4 And if a man shall open a 
 pit, or if a man shall dig a pit, and 
 not cover it, and an ox or an ass fall 
 therein ; 
 
 34. The owner of the pit shall make 
 it good, and give money unto the 
 owner of them; and the dead beast 
 shall be his. 
 
 35 § And if one man’s ox hurt 
 another’s, that he die; then they shall 
 sell the live ox, and divide the money 
 of it; and the dead ox also they shall 
 divide. 
 
 36 Or if it be known that the ox 
 hath used to push in time past, and 
 his owner hath not kept him in; he 
 shall surely pay ox for ox; and the 
 dead shall be his own. 
 
 was stoned, and its flesh was treated as car- 
 rion. In ordinary cases, the owner suffered 
 only the loss of his beast. But if the ox had 
 been previously known to be vicious, the 
 guilty negligence of its owner, in not keeping 
 it under restraint, was reckoned, prima facie, 
 as a capital offence. His life might however 
 be commuted for a fine to be determined by 
 the judges; and, as we may infer with proba- 
 bility, to be agreed to by the parents or near 
 relations of the slain person. 
 
 32. If the slain person was a slave, the 
 ox was to be stoned to death, and its owner 
 was to pay to the master of the slain person 
 what appears to have been the standard price 
 of a slave, thirty shekels of silver. See on 
 Lev. xxv. 44—46, Xxvii. 3. 
 
 33, 34. If a man either left his pit (or 
 well) exposed, or dug a new one without 
 protecting it, and an animal fell therein, he 
 was to pay the value of the animal to its 
 owner, but was allowed to appropriate the 
 carcase. ‘The usual mode of protecting. a 
 well was probably then, as it is now in the 
 East, by building round it a low circular 
 wall. 
 
 35, 36. ‘The dead ox in this case, as well 
 as in the preceding one, must have been worth 
 no more than the price of the hide, as the 
 flesh could not be eaten. See Lev. xvii. 1—6. 
 There is here the same sort of prudent re- 
 straint laid upon the owners of vicious ani- 
 mals as in v, 29. 
 
 Cuap. XXII. The Book of the Covenant, 
 continued. 
 
 E OMS. PORT 11: 
 
 o 
 
 CHAPTER XXII. 
 
 t Of theft. 5 Of damage. 7 Of trespasses, 
 14 Of borrowing. 16 Of fornication. 18 
 Of witchcraft. 19 Of beastiality. 20 Of 
 idolatry. 21% Of strangers, widows, and 
 
 Satherless. 25 Of usury. 26 Of pledges. 28 
 Of reverence to magistrates. 29 Of the first- 
 
 Sruits. 
 
 F a man shall steal an ox, or a 
 
 'sheep, and kill it, or sell it; hetor, goaz, 
 
 shall restore five oxen for an ox, and 
 “ four sheep for a sheep. 
 
 24 If a thief be found breaking **° 
 up, and be smitten that he die, there 
 shall no blood be shed for him. 
 
 3 If the sun be risen upon him, 
 there shall be blood shed for him; for 
 he should make full restitution; if he 
 have nothing, then he shall be sold 
 for his theft. 
 
 4 If the theft be certainly found 
 in his hand alive, whether it be ox, or 
 ass, or sheep; he shall restore double. 
 
 1. The theft of an ox appears to have been 
 regarded as a greater crime than the theft of 
 a sheep, not from the mere consideration of 
 value, but because it shewed a stronger pur- 
 pose in wickedness to take the larger and more 
 powerful animal. It may have been on similar 
 moral ground that the thief, when he had 
 proved his persistency in crime by adding to 
 his theft the slaughter, or sale, of the animal, 
 was to restore four times its value in the case 
 of a sheep (cf. 2 S, xii, 6), and five times its 
 value in the case of an ox; but if the animal 
 was still in his possession alive (see v. 4) he 
 had to make only twofold restitution. 
 
 2. breaking up| breaking in. 
 
 3,4. If athief, in breaking into a dwell- 
 ing in the night, was slain, the person who 
 slew him did not incur the guilt of blood; but 
 if the same occurred in daylight, the- slayer 
 was guilty in accordance with xxi, 12. The 
 distinction may have been based on the fact 
 that in the light of day there was a fair chance 
 of identifying and apprehending the thief, or, 
 at least, his design would be apparent: but in 
 the darkness of night there could be no reck- 
 oning as to how far his purpose might extend, 
 and there would be a great probability of his 
 escaping unrecognized. When a thief was ap- 
 prehended in the act, he could be forced to 
 make restitution if he had the means, and if 
 not he was to be sold as a bondslave. ‘The 
 latter punishment may be likened to our penal 
 servitude; and, in the case of a Hebrew, it 
 could not be prolonged beyond six years, 
 See xxi, 2. 
 
 @ 2 Sam. 
 
348 
 
 5 " If aman shall cause a field 
 
 or vineyard to be eaten, and shall put 
 
 in his beast, and shall feed in another 
 
 man’s field; of the best of his own 
 
 field, and of the best of his own vine- 
 yard, shall he make restitution. 
 
 6 4 If fire break out, and catch in 
 thorns, so that the stacks of corn, 
 or the standing corn, or the field, be 
 consumed therewith; he that kindled 
 the fire shall surely make restitution. 
 
 7 4@ Ifa man shall deliver unto 
 his neighbour money or stuff to keep, 
 and it be stolen out of the man’s 
 house; if the thief be found, let him 
 pay double. 
 
 8 If the thief be not found, then 
 the master of the house shall be 
 brought unto the judges, to see whe- 
 ther he have put his hand unto his 
 neighbour’s goods. 
 
 9 For all manner of trespass, whe- 
 ther it be for ox, for ass, for sheep, 
 
 for raiment, or for any manner of | 
 
 lost thing, which another challengeth 
 to be his, the cause of both parties 
 shall come before the judges; and 
 whom the judges shall condemn, he 
 shall pay double unto his neighbour. 
 10 If a man deliver unto his neigh- 
 bour an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or 
 
 4, Seeonvw. tI. 
 
 5. shall put in his beast, and shall feed | 
 Rather, ‘shall let his beast go loose, 
 and it shall feed. (Thus the LXX., 
 Vulg., Syr., Luther, Zunz, &c.) He who 
 had allowed his beast to stray and consume 
 the pasture or the grapes of his neighbour, 
 had to restore out of the best of his posses- 
 sions a like quantity of produce, without 
 regard to the quality of that which had been 
 consumed. 
 
 7. pay double] Cf. v. 4. 
 
 8. It would appear that if the master of 
 the house could clear himself of imputation, 
 the loss of the pledged article fell upon its 
 owner. 
 
 - judges| See on xxi. 6. 
 
 9. all manner of trespass| In every case 
 of theft, he who was accused, and he who 
 had lost the stolen property, were both to ap- 
 pear before the judges (xviil. 25, 26): the 
 convicted thief, under ordinary circumstances, 
 was to pay double. See vv. 4, 7. 
 
 . 10—13... This law appears to relate chief- 
 ly to herdsmen employed by the owners of 
 
 £XODUS. XID 
 
 [v. 5—17. 
 
 any beast, to keep; and it die, or 
 be hurt, or driven away, no man see- 
 Ing if: 
 
 11 Then shall an oath of the Lorp 
 be between them both, that he hath 
 not put his hand unto his neighbour’s 
 goods; and the owner of it shall ac- 
 cept thereof, and he shall not, make it 
 good. 
 
 12 And ?if it be stolen from him, ee 31 
 he shall make restitution unto the ® 
 owner thereof. 
 
 13 If it be torn in pieces, then let 
 him bring it for witness, and he shall 
 not make good that which was torn. 
 
 14 4 And if a man borrow ought 
 of his neighbour, and it be hurt, or 
 die, the owner thereof Jeing not with 
 it, he shall surely make zt good. 
 
 15 ut if the owner thereof be 
 with it, he shall not make it good: 
 if it be an hired thing, it came for 
 his hire. 
 
 16 4 And ‘if a man entice a maid < Deut. 2 
 that is not betrothed, and lie with * 
 her, he shall surely endow her to be 
 his wife. 
 
 17 If her father utterly at to 
 give her unto him, he shall * pay 
 money according to the dowry of 
 virgins. 
 
 cattle. It implies that, if he to whom the 
 
 creatures were entrusted could prove that he 
 
 had taken all reasonable care and precaution, 
 
 the risk of loss or injury fell upon the owner: 
 and if no witness cculd be produced, the oath : 
 of the herdsman himself that he had performed 
 his duty was accepted. But when an animal 
 was stolen (v. 12), it was presumed either 
 that the herdsman might have prevented it, or 
 that he could find the thief and bring him to 
 justice (see v, 4). When an animal was killed 
 by a wild beast, the keeper had to produce 
 the mangled carcase, not only in proof of the 
 fact, but to shew that he had, by his vigilance 
 and courage, deprived the wild beast of its ; 
 Prey. t 
 
 14,15. If a man houcenal or hired, an 
 animal, it was at his risk, unless the owner 
 accompanied it. 
 
 15. it came for his hire] ‘These words 
 are obscure, but they probably mean that the 
 sum paid for hiring was regarded as covering 
 the risk of accident. 
 
 16,17. The man who seduced a girl that 
 was not betrothed had to forfeit for her bene- 
 
 a se. ae 
 
meen 
 
 v. 18—-29,] 
 
 18 @ Thou shalt not suffer a witch 
 to live. 
 
 19 4 Whosoever lieth with a beast 
 shall surely be put to death. 
 
 Bex US) OUCET: 
 
 (Sy) 
 
 of my people that is poor by thee, 
 thou shalt not be to him as an 
 usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon 
 him usury. 
 
 = 
 
 eut.x3. 20 4 @He that sacrificeth unto any 26 If thou at all take thy neigh- 
 #5 god, save unto the Lorp only, he bour’s raiment to pledge, thou shalt 
 , shall be utterly destroyed. deliver it unto him by that the sun 
 v.19. 21 4 ©Thou shalt neither vex a goeth down: 
 stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were 27 For that is his covering only, it zs 
 strangers in the land of Egypt. his raiment for his skin: wherein shall 
 ch.7 22 Ye shall not afflict any he sleep? and it shall come to pass, 
 widow, or fatherless child. when he crieth unto me, that I will 
 23 If thou afflict them in any wise, hear; for I am gracious. 
 and they cry at all unto me, [| will 28 4 “Thou shalt not revile the ae 23. 
 surely hear their cry ; Tgods, nor curse the ruler of thy i Or, 
 24 And my wrath shall wax hot, people. she bit 
 and I will kill you with the sword; 29 % Thou shalt not delay to offer PI TaG 
 ev. 25. and your wives shall be widows, and the ‘first of thy ripe fruits, and of 1 Heb. 
 ut.23. your children fatherless. thy ‘liquors: *the firstborn of thy Paes 
 ass. 25 4 £If thou lend money to any sons shalt thou give unto me. r bere 
 
 fit a proper sum for a dowry (see on Deut. 
 xxii, 28, 29), and to marry her, if her father 
 would allow him to do so, ‘The seducer of a 
 
 dered afflict, includes all cold and contemp- 
 tuous treatment. See Deut. x. 18. The same 
 duty is enforced with the promise of a bless- 
 
 betrothed girl was to be stoned. See Deut. 
 XXL 24,27, 
 
 18. Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live] 
 The practice of witchcraft by both sexes is 
 condemned in Lev, xx.27; Deut. xviii. g—12. 
 Wizards alone are mentioned Lev. xix, 31. 
 The witch is here named to represent the 
 class. ‘This is the earliest denunciation of 
 witchcraft in the Law. In every form of 
 witchcraft there is an appeal to a power not 
 acting in subordination to the Divine Law. 
 From all such notions and tendencies true 
 worship is designed to deliver us, ‘The prac- 
 tice of witchcraft was therefore an act of re- 
 bellion against Jehovah, and, as such, was a 
 capital crime, The passages bearing on the 
 subject in the Prophets, as well as those in 
 the Law, carry a lesson for all ages. Isa, vill. 
 19, XIX. 3, xliv. 25, xlvil, 12, 13, &c, 
 
 19. 
 
 20. ‘This was probably an old formula, 
 the sense of which, on its ethical side, is com- 
 prised in the First and Second Command- 
 ments. 
 
 shall be utterly destroyed) The Hebrew 
 word here used is cherem (i.e. devoted), See 
 on Ley, xxvii. 28. 
 
 See Lev. xviil. 23. 
 
 Q1. a stranger| More properly, a fo- 
 reigner (Heb. geer), one who dwells in a 
 land to which he does not belong. See on 
 Xx. 10. The command is repeated xxiil. 9. 
 See also Lev. xix. 33, 34; Deut. x. 17—I9. 
 
 2924, ‘The meaning of the word ren- 
 
 ing, Deut. xiv, 29. 
 
 25. See on Lev, xxv. 35—43; cf. Deut. 
 XXlil. Ig. 
 
 26, 27. The law regarding pledges is 
 expanded Deut. xxiv. 6, 1o—13. 
 
 28. the gods| Heb. elobim. See on xxi. 6. 
 This passage has been understood in three 
 different ways: (1) Some of the best modern 
 authorities take it as the name of God (as in 
 Gen. i. 1), and this certainly seems best to 
 represent the Hebrew, and to suit the con- 
 text. So de Wette, Knobel, Schott, Keil, 
 Benisch, &c. (2) Our Version follows the 
 LXX., Vulg., Luther, Cranmer, &c.; it is also 
 countenanced by Philo (‘ Vit. Mos.’ IIr. 26), 
 and Josephus (‘ Ant.’ Iv. 8. § 10; ‘Contr. 
 Ap.’ II. 34), who make a boast of the libe- 
 rality of the sentiment as regards the gods of 
 other nations. (3) The word is rendered as 
 judges by the Targums, Saadia, the Syriac, 
 Theodoret, Geneva Fr. and Eng., Zunz, 
 Herxh., &c., and this makes good sense, but 
 it is rightly objected that e/ohim, to have the 
 meaning according to which alone it could be 
 so rendered, should have the article prefixed. 
 See on xxi. 6. 
 
 curse the ruler, &c.] Acts xxiil. 5. 
 
 29, 30. The offering of Firstfruits ap- 
 pears to have been a custom of primitive an- 
 tiquity, and was connected with the earliest 
 acts of sacrifice. See Gen. iv. 3, 4. ‘The re- 
 ferences to it here and in xxiii. 19 had proba- 
 bly been handed down from patriarchal times. 
 The specific law relating to the firstborn of 
 
ee) 
 
 30 Likewise shalt thou do with 
 thine oxen, and with thy sheep: seven 
 days it shall be with his dam; on the 
 eighth day thou shalt give it me. 
 
 31 { And ye shall be holy men 
 unto me: “neither shall ye eat any 
 flesh that is torn of beasts in the 
 field; ye shall cast it to the dogs, 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 Of slander and false witness. 3, 6 Of justice. 
 4 Of charitableness, 10 Of the year of rest. 
 12 Of the sabbath. 13 Of idolatry. 
 the three feasts. 18 Of the blood and the fat 
 of the sacrifice. 20 An Angel is promised, 
 with a blessing, tf they obey him. 
 
 HOU sshalt not "raise a false 
 
 report: put not thine hand with 
 the wicked to be an unrighteous wit- 
 ness. 
 
 2 @ Thou shalt not follow a mul- 
 titude to do evil; neither shalt thou 
 ‘speak in a cause to decline after many 
 to wrest judgment: 
 
 a" 
 
 EX@DUS TNX, 
 
 14 Of 
 
 [v. 30—9. 
 
 3 4 Neither shalt thou counte- 
 nance a poor man in his cause. 
 
 4 4 If thou meet thine enemy’s 
 ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt 
 surely bring it back to him again. 
 
 5 “If thou see the ass of him that ¢ Deut. 2 
 hateth thee lying under his burden,* _ 
 land wouldest forbear to help him, '0r. 
 
 rs ee it tho 
 thou shalt surely help with him. cea fo 
 6 Thou shalt not wrest the jud - te 
 ment of thy poor in his cause. wouldest 
 cease to 
 
 7 Keep thee far from a false mat- Zave thy 
 ter; and the innocent and righteous Joe yee. 
 slay thou not: for I will not justify pinot 
 the wicked. leave it to 
 
 8 { And ’thou shalt take no gift: tin 
 for the gift blindeth ‘the wise, and ;Pews7 
 perverteth the words of the righteous. Eccl 
 
 9g 4 Also thou shalt not oppress at Heb. 
 stranger: for ye know the ‘heart of a /({3"* 
 stranger, seeing ye were strangers in $2. 
 
 the land of Egypt. 
 
 living creatures was brought out in a strong 
 light in connection with the deliverance from 
 Egypt (xiii. 2, 12, 13). Regarding ‘the 
 eighth day,” see Lev. xxii. 27. The form for 
 offering Firstfruits is described Deut. xxvi. 
 2—11. But besides these usages exclusively 
 referring to Firstfruits, there were others em- 
 bodying the same religious idea in the rites of 
 the festivals of the Passover and Pentecost, 
 See on Lev, xxiii. 
 
 the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors] 
 The literal rendering of the Hebrew is given 
 in the margin (‘‘thy fulness and thy tear”), 
 and is retained in Luther’s version.  First- 
 fruits (O°)33, xxiii. 19) are not here men- 
 tioned by name; but the connection clearly 
 shows that they are meant. The latter of the 
 two Hebrew substantives (7) does not 
 occur elsewhere. But according to its ety- 
 mology, it means that which drops like a 
 tear. The LXX. has amrapyas GA@vos kal 
 Anvot gov. Vulg. decimas tuas et primitias 
 tuas. ‘These renderings, as well as that in 
 our Bible (which nearly follows Onk. and 
 the Syr.), are of course paraphrases rather 
 than versions. 
 
 31. ‘The sanctification of the nation was 
 emphatically symbolized by strictness of diet as 
 regards both the kind of animal, and the mode 
 of slaughtering. See Lev. chaps. xi, and xvii. 
 
 CHAP. XXIII, 
 nant, concluded. 
 1—3. ‘These four commands, addressed 
 to the conscience without sanction of punish- 
 ment, are so many illustrations of the Ninth 
 
 The Book of the Cove- 
 
 Commandment, mainly in reference to the 
 
 giving of evidence in legal causes, It is for- . 
 bidden :— 
 
 1. To circulate a false report (cf. Lev. 
 XIX. 16). 
 
 2. ‘To join hand in hand with another 
 in bearing false witness. 
 
 3- To follow a majority in favouring an 
 unrighteous cause. 
 
 4. ‘To shew partiality to a man’s cause 
 because he is poor (cf. Lev. xix. 15). 
 
 2. ‘This verse might be more strictly ren- 
 dered, Thou shalt not follow the many to evil ; 
 neither shalt thou bear witness in a cause so as 
 to incline after the many to pervert justice. 
 
 3. countenance} Rather, to show par- 
 tiality to. 
 
 4, 5. So far was the spirit of the Law 
 from encouraging personal revenge that it 
 would not allow a man to neglect an oppor- 
 tunity of saving his enemy from loss. On 
 the apparently different spirit expressed in 
 Deut, xxiii. 6, and on the reference to the 
 subject in Matt. v. 43, see in loc. Cf, Deut. 
 XXil, I—=4, 
 
 5. wouldest forbear to help him, &c.| The 
 words are rather difficult, but the sense ap- 
 pears to be:—Jf thou see the ass of thine enemy 
 lying down under his burden, thou shalt forbear 
 to pass by him; thou shalt help him in loosening 
 the girths of the ass. ‘The passage is rendered 
 to this effect by Saadia, Gesenius, Knobel, &c, 
 
 6—9. ‘These verses comprise four pre- 
 cepts, which are evidently addressed to those 
 in authority as judges:— 
 
Lev. 25. 
 
 v. 1o—14. | 
 
 1o And “six years thou shalt sow 
 thy land, and shalt gather in the fruits 
 | thereof: 
 i 11 But the seventh year thou shalt 
 let it rest and lie still; that the poor 
 ; of thy people may eat: and what 
 se, they leave the beasts of the field shall 
 wees eat. In like manner thou shalt deal 
 we with thy vineyard, and with thy ! olive- 
 on yard: 
 uke 13. 
 
 12 7Six days thou shalt do thy work, 
 
 1, To do justice to the poor.—Compar- 
 ing wv, 6 with v. 3, it was the part of the 
 judge to defend the poor against the oppres- 
 sion of the rich, and the part of the witness 
 to take care lest his feelings of natural pity 
 should tempt him to falsify his evidence, 
 
 2. To be cautious of inflicting capital 
 punishment on one whose guilt was not 
 clearly proved.—A doubtful case was rather 
 to be left to God Himself, who would ‘ not 
 justify the wicked,” nor suffer him to go un- 
 punished though he might be acquitted by 
 an earthly tribunal. «. 7. 
 
 3. To take no bribe or present which 
 might in any way pervert judgment (wv. 8); 
 cf, Num, xvi. 15; 1 S. xii. 3. 
 
 4. To vindicate the rights of the stranger 
 (v.9)—rather, the foreigner. See on xx. Io. 
 ‘This verse is a repetition of xxii, 21, but the 
 precept is there addressed to the people at 
 large, while it is here addressed to the judges 
 in reference to their official duties, ‘This is 
 Knobel’s explanation; but Bleek and others, 
 overlooking the very distinct contexts, take 
 the repetition as merely redundant.—The 
 word rendered /eart is more strictly soul 
 (W5}), and would be better represented here 
 by feelings, Cf. on xxviii. 3 and on Lev, 
 KV. 17, 
 
 10—12. ‘This is the first mention of the 
 Sabbatical year; the law for it is given at 
 length Lev. xxv, 2. Both the Sabbatical year 
 and the weekly Sabbath are here spoken of 
 exclusively in their relation to the poor, as 
 bearing testimony to the equality of the people 
 in their Covenant with Jehovah, In the first 
 of these institutions, the proprietor of the soil 
 gave up his rights for the year to the whole 
 community of living creatures, not excepting 
 the beasts: in the latter, the master gave up 
 his claim for the day to the services of his 
 servants and cattle. See Note ‘On the 
 Sabbath day,’ § V. after ch. xx. 
 
 11. thou shalt let it rest and lie still} Some 
 understand this expression to relate to the 
 crops, not to the land, so as to mean, thou 
 shalt leave them (i.e. the crops) and give them 
 up to the poor, &c, (Kranold, Hupfeld, Da- 
 
 EOD USM RELY, 
 
 and on the seventh day thou shalt 
 rest; that thine ox and thine ass may 
 rest, and the son of thy handmaid, 
 and the stranger, may be refreshed. 
 
 13 And in all things that I have 
 said ynto you be circumspect: and 
 make no mention of the name of 
 other gods, neither let it be heard 
 out of thy mouth. 
 
 14 * Three times thou shalt keep ¢ Deut 
 
 a feast unto me in the year. 
 
 vidson.) ‘The words, if they stood by them- 
 selves, might bear this interpretation as well 
 as that given in our version, and neither in- 
 terpretation is opposed to Lev, xxv. 2—5, where 
 it is said that the land was to remain untilled. 
 But it has been presumed without the least 
 authority that the writer of Leviticus made a 
 mistake, and that the original law, as it is 
 here given, was not intended to prevent the 
 land from being tilled as usual, but only to 
 forbid that the crops should be harvested by 
 the proprietor, in order that the poor might 
 gather them for themselves. See on Lev. xxv. 
 2. It has also been objected that this origi- 
 nal law could not have been written by 
 Moses in the wilderness, where, of course, it 
 could not have been observed, and that this 
 difficulty occurred to the writer of Leviticus, 
 and induced him to prefix the words ‘* when 
 ye come into the land which I give you.” 
 But surely this difficulty, if we admit it to 
 have a real existence, would have been avoided 
 by any one writing a clever fictitious narra- 
 tive with a view to deceive his own, or later 
 ages. It seems easier and more reasonable to 
 regard Moses as having legislated and written 
 with the deep conviction ever in his mind 
 that the promise of the possession of the 
 land made to Abraham was sure of fulfil- 
 ment, See on vv. 20, 31. 
 
 12. may be refreshed Literally, may take 
 breath. 
 
 13. Cf, Deut. iv. 9, Vi..13,,14; Josh, xxii. 5, 
 
 14—17. This is the first mention of the 
 three great Yearly Festivals. The Feast of Un- 
 leavened Bread, in its connection with the 
 Paschal Lamb, is spoken of in ch. xii., xiii. : 
 but the two others are here first named. ‘The 
 whole three are spoken of as if they were 
 familiarly known to the people. ‘The points 
 that are especially enjoined are that every 
 male Israelite should attend them at the Sanc- 
 tuary (cf. xxxiv. 23), and that he should take 
 with him an offering for Jehovah, He was, 
 on each occasion, to present himself before 
 his King with his tribute in his hand. That 
 the latter condition belonged to all the Feasts, 
 
 oot 
 
352 EX @ RUB. aad Fit [v. 15—19. 
 
 Z chap. 13. “yf 5 “Thou shalt keep the feast of the year, when thou hast gathered in 
 4 18 
 
 + %34 * nleavened bread : (thou shalt eat un- 
 leavened bread seven days, as I com- 
 manded thee, in the time appointed 
 of the month Abib; for in it thou 
 
 Deut. 16. Camest out from Egypt: and none 
 Eeclus, 3, Shall appear before me empty :) 
 eh 
 
 16 And the feast of harvest, the 
 firstfruits of thy labours, which thou 
 hast sown in the field: and the feast 
 of ingathering, which is in the end of 
 
 thy labours out of the field. 
 
 17 Three times in the year all thy 
 males shall appear before the Lord 
 Gop. 
 
 18 Thou shalt not offer the blood 
 of my sacrifice with leavened bread; | 
 neither shall the fat of my | sacrifice ! Or,feas 
 remain until the morning. 
 
 19 * The first of the firstfruits of % chap. 3 
 thy land thou shalt bring into the a 
 
 though it is here stated only in regard to 
 the Passover, cannot be doubted. See Deut. 
 XV1. 16. 
 
 15,16. Onthe Feast of Unleavened Bread, 
 or the Passover, see xil. I—28, 43—50, XIiil. 
 3—16, xxxiv, 18—20; Lev. xxill, 4—r4. 
 On the Feast of the Firstfruits of Harvest, 
 called also the Feast of Weeks, and the 
 Feast of Pentecost, see xxxiv. 22; Lev, xxiii. 
 Is—21. On the Feast of Ingathering, called 
 also the Feast of. ‘Tabernacles, see Lev, xxiii. 
 34—36, 39—43- 
 
 16. in the end of the year| Cf. xxxiv. 22. 
 The year here spoken of must have been the 
 civil or agrarian year, which began after har- 
 vest, when the ground was prepared for sow- 
 ing. Cf, Lev. xxiit. 39; Deut. xvi. 13—15. 
 The sacred year began in spring, with the 
 month Abib, or Nisan. See on Exod, xii. 2, 
 and on Ley. xxv. 9. 
 
 when thou hast gathered| Rather, when thou 
 gatherest in. ‘The Hebrew does not im- 
 ply that the gathering in was to be completed 
 before the Feast was held. In some years 
 the harvest must have fallen later than in 
 others. It was perhaps rarely completed be- 
 fore the time appointed for the Feast. And 
 hence the fitness of the expression, ‘* which is 
 in the end of the year,” as explained in the 
 preceding note. 
 
 18, 19. These verses comprise three 
 maxims, each of which, according to the best 
 interpretation, appears to relate to one of 
 the Festivals, in due order, as named in vv, 
 I4—I7. 
 
 18. the blood of my sacrifice] It is gene- 
 rally considered that this must refer to the 
 Paschal Lamb, ‘The blood that was sprin- 
 kled on the door-posts, or (after the first occa- 
 sion) on the Altar, emphatically represented 
 ‘the sacrifice of the Lorp’s passover.” See 
 Mil. 7, FI, 34,142, 231 97- 
 
 the fat of my sacrifice] Strictly, the fat 
 of my feast. In the parallel passage xxxiv. 
 25, what appears to be the equivalent expres- 
 sion is, ‘‘ the sacrifice of the feast of the pass- 
 over.” It has been inferred with great pro- 
 
 bability that the fat of my feast means not 
 literally the fat of the Paschal Lamb, but the 
 best part of the feast, that is, the Paschal 
 Lamb itself (Knobel, Keil). ‘This explana- 
 tion best accords with xii. 10, where there is 
 no mention of the fat. If we take the words 
 in their mere literal sense, they must refer to 
 the fat of the sacrifices in general, which, 
 when the ritual of the sacrifices was arranged, 
 was burnt upon the Altar by the Priests (Lev. 
 1. 8, ili. 3—5). | 
 
 19. The frst of the firstfruits of thy land] 
 This most probably means the dest, or chief 
 of the Firstfruits, &c. As the preceding pre- 
 cept appears to refer to the Passover, so it is 
 likely that this refers to Pentecost, as espe- 
 cially to the offering of what are called in 
 v. 16 ‘the firstfruits of thy labours;” that is, 
 the two wave loaves described Lev. xxiii. 17., 
 They are called in Leviticus, ‘“ the firstfruits 
 unto the Lorp;” and it is reasonable that 
 they should here be designated the chief of 
 the Firstfruits. If, with Keil and others, we 
 suppose the precept to relate to the offerings 
 of Firstfruits in general, the command is no 
 more than a repetition of xxii. 29. 
 
 Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s 
 milk| ‘This precept is repeated xxxiv. 263 
 Deut. xiv. 21. There has been much dis- 
 cussion as to its meaning. St Augustine 
 and some more recent commentators have 
 given up the explanation of it in despair, If 
 we are to connect the first of the two pre- 
 ceding precepts with the Passover, and the 
 second with Pentecost, it seems reasonable to 
 connect this with the Feast of ‘Tabernacles, | 
 The only explanation which accords with this . 
 connection is one which refers to some sort of | 
 superstitious custom connected with the har- ; 
 vest. Abarbanel speaks of such a custom, in 
 
 | 
 
 which a kid was seethed in its mother’s milk 
 to propitiate in some way the deities, But 
 the subject is more pointedly illustrated in an 
 ancient commentary on the Pentateuch by a 
 Karaite Jew, from the manuscript of which a 
 quotation is given by Cudworth (‘On the 
 Lord’s Supper,’ p. 36). It is there said to have 
 been a prevalent usage to boil a kid in its 
 
Vv. 20—23. | Has O.D.U Se KOS LTT 
 
 th. 34-26. house of the Lorp thy God. *Thou 
 
 shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s 
 
 milk. 
 
 bhap. 33. 20 @ *Behold, I send an Angel 
 
 before thee, to keep thee in the way, 
 and to bring thee into the place which 
 I have prepared. 
 
 21 Beware of him, and obey his 
 voice, provoke him not; for he will 
 not pardon your transgressions: for 
 my name 7s in him. 
 
 Oo 
 Cat 
 Gr 
 
 22 But if thou shalt indeed obey 
 his voice, and do all that I speak; 
 then I will be an enemy unto thine 
 enemies, and "an adversary unto thine !0r, 
 adversaries. Waa 
 23 ‘For mine Angel shall go be- 77a 
 fore thee, and “bring thee in unto /-. 
 the Amorites, and the Hittites, and2 * 
 the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, 7,J°** 
 and the Hivites, and the Jebusites: 
 
 and I will cut them off. 
 
 mother’s milk, when all the crops were ga- 
 thered in, and to sprinkle with the milk the 
 fruit trees, fields and gardens, as a charm to 
 improve the crops of the coming year. ‘The 
 explanation based upon this is preferred by 
 Bochart, John Gregory, Grotius, Knobel and 
 others. ‘The command, so understood, is a 
 caution against the practice of magic. See on 
 xxii, 18. But in a matter so doubtful, it is 
 but fair to give such other explanations as 
 seem most worthy of notice. 
 
 r. It has been taken as a prohibition of 
 the eating of flesh and milk together (the 
 Targums, Erpenius). This is countenanced 
 by the traditional custom of the Jews (‘ Mish- 
 na,’ Cholin vit1. 1; Maimon. ‘de Cit. Vel.’ 
 9; Buxtorf, ‘Syn. Jud.’ p. 596). 
 
 2. It has been supposed to forbid the 
 eating of a kid before it has been weaned 
 from its mother—Luther, Calvin, Fagius, 
 &e. 
 
 3. It has been referred to a custom now 
 existing among the Arabs, which is certainly 
 of great antiquity, of preparing a gross sort 
 of food by stewing a kid in milk, with the 
 addition of certain ingredients of a stimu- 
 lating nature, which is commonly called in 
 Arabic, ‘‘a kid in his mother’s milk.” Aben- 
 Ezra, Keil, Thomson (‘The Land and the 
 Book,’ ch, vitt.), &c. 
 
 4. It has been brought into connection 
 with the prohibitions to slaughter a cow and 
 a calf, or a ewe and her lamb, on the same 
 day (Lev. xxii, 28), and to take a bird along 
 with her young in the nest (Deut. xxii. 6). 
 It is thus understood as a protest against 
 cruelty and outraging the order of nature (xe 
 commisceatur germen cum radicibus). ‘Theo- 
 doret, Vatablus, Ewald, &c. See Bochart, 
 ‘Flieroz,’ lor. c. 52% 
 
 20—33. ‘These verses appear to form 
 the conclusion of the Book of the Covenant. 
 They contain promises of the constant pre- 
 sence and guidance of Jehovah (wv. 20—22), 
 of the driving out of the nations of the Cana- 
 anites by degrees (23—30), and of the subse- 
 quent enlargement of Hebrew dominion (es 
 31). But these promises are accompanied by 
 
 wor, I; 
 
 solemn exhortations and threatenings.—Cf. 
 xxxiv. Io—17, where similar promises and 
 warnings are prefixed to the shorter compen- 
 dium of Law which was written down after 
 the renewal of the Tables. 
 
 20, 21. an Angel...for my name is in him] 
 The Angel appears to mean the presence and 
 the power of Jehovah Himself, manifested in 
 the work of leading and delivering His people, 
 and maintaining His Covenant with them. 
 Cf. xxxii. 34, XXxlii, 2, 15, 16, and the notes; 
 see also on Gen. xii. 7. 
 
 20. the place which I have prepared] ‘The 
 promise of the Land may be seen to inspire 
 the legislation and conduct of Moses through- 
 out his career. ‘There is no trace of uncer- 
 tainty as to the ultimate aim of his mission. 
 He had been called to lead the people to the 
 home prepared for them, according to the 
 promise first made to Abraham, and to disci- 
 pline them in their passage through the wil- 
 derness to become a strong nation. 
 
 22. and an adversary unto thine adversa- 
 ries| ‘The rendering in the margin is the 
 better one. Cf. Deut. xx. 4. 
 
 23. The nations here mentioned are those 
 only that inhabited the land strictly called the 
 Land of Canaan, lying between the Jordan 
 and the Great Sea. See Num. xxxiv. 2; cf. 
 Exod. xxxiv. II. 
 
 Twill cut them off] It has been too abso- 
 lutely taken for granted that it was the Divine 
 will that the inhabitants of Canaan should be 
 utterly exterminated. ‘We know that, as a 
 matter of fact, great numbers of the Canaanite 
 families lived on, and intermarried with the 
 Israelites (see Judg. i., ii., with such cases as 
 those of the Sidonians, of Araunah, of Uriah, 
 of the family of Rahab, &c.). ‘The national 
 existence of the Canaanites was indeed to be 
 utterly destroyed, every trace of their idola- 
 tries was to be blotted out, no social inter- 
 course was to be held with them while they 
 served other gods, nor were alliances of any 
 kind to be formed with them. ‘These com~ 
 mands are emphatically repeated and expand- 
 ed in Deuteronomy (vii.; xil. I—4, 29—3 T). 
 
 Z 
 
354 
 
 ” Deut. 7. after their works: 
 
 25. 
 
 ° Deut. 7. 
 
 14. 
 
 +t Heb. 
 neck. 
 
 24 Thou shalt not bow down to 
 their gods, nor serve them, nor do 
 *but thou shalt 
 utterly overthrow them, and quite 
 break down their images. 
 
 25 And ye shall serve the Lorp 
 your God, and he shall bless thy bread, 
 and thy water; and I will take sick- 
 ness away from the midst of thee. 
 
 26 4 ° There shall nothing cast 
 their young, nor be barren, in thy 
 land: the number of thy days I will 
 fulfil. 
 
 27 I will send my fear before thee, 
 and will destroy all the people to 
 whom thou shalt come, and I will 
 make all thine enemies turn their 
 * backs unto thee. 
 
 BX OD U5 Se 
 
 [v. 24—31. 
 
 28 And 4I will send hornets before 7 Josh. 2 
 
 12, 
 
 thee, which shall drive out the Hivite, 
 the Canaanite, and the Hittite, from 
 before thee. 4 
 
 29 I will not drive them out from 
 before thee in one year; lest the land 
 become desolate, and the beast of the 
 held multiply against thee. 
 
 30 By little and little I will drive 
 them out from before thee, until thou 
 be increased, and inherit the land. 
 
 31 And I will set thy bounds from 
 the Red sea even unto the sea of the 
 Philistines, and from the desert unto 
 the river: for I will deliver the in- 
 habitants of the land into your hand; 
 and thou shalt drive them out before 
 thee. 
 
 They were often broken by the Israelites, who 
 had to suffer for their transgression (Num. 
 XXxxill. 55; Judg. li. 3). But it is alike con- 
 trary to the spirit of the Divine Law, and to 
 the facts bearing on the subject scattered in the 
 history, to suppose that any obstacle was put 
 in the way of well disposed individuals of the 
 denounced nations who left their sins and 
 were willing to join the service of Jehovah. 
 The Law, as it was addressed to the Israelites, 
 never forgets the stranger (rather, the fo- 
 reigner, LXX. zpoondvtos) who had volun- 
 tarily come within their gates. See xx. Io. 
 The spiritual blessings of the Covenant were 
 always open to those who sincerely and ear- 
 nestly desired to possess them. Lev. xix. 34, 
 Xxiv, 22. A narrowness and cruelty in this 
 and other respects has been very generally 
 ascribed to the Law of Moses, from which it 
 has been justly vindicated by Salvador, ‘ His- 
 toire des Institutions de Moise,’ Vol. 1. p. 447. 
 
 24, Cf. Num, xxx. 52; Deut. vii. 5, 
 LOR .029, :30, XX. 11 83 
 
 2.7. destroy] Rather, overthrow. See on 
 Gres Ch. xvir4s Deut. divas $ (JOsh. thor T, 
 
 28. hornets] Cf. Deut. vii. 20; Josh. 
 xxiv, 12. The Hebrew word is in the singu- 
 lar number, used for the species—the hornet. 
 Bochart (‘ Hieroz.’ lib. Iv. c. 13) has collected 
 instances from ancient authorities of large 
 bodies of men being driven away by noxious 
 insects and other small creatures; and the 
 author of the Book of Wisdom (xi. 8, 9) 
 with some of the commentators have supposed. 
 that hornets are literally meant (see ‘ Crit. 
 Sac.’). But there seems to be no reasonable 
 doubt that the word is used figuratively for a 
 cause of terror and discouragement. Bees 
 are spoken of “in the like sense, Deut. 1. 44; 
 
 Ps, cxviii, 12. The passage has been thus un- 
 derstood by most critics, 
 
 29. beast of the field| ‘The term is ap- 
 plied to any wild animal; here it means a 
 destructive one, as it does also Deut. vii. 22: 
 cf. Lev, xxvi. 22; 2 K. xvii. 95; Job v, 925 
 Ezek. xiv. 15. 
 
 31. In wv. 23, the limits of the Land of 
 Canaan, strictly so called, are indicated; to 
 this, when the Israelites were about to take 
 possession of it, were added the regions of 
 Gilead and Bashan on the left side of the Jor- 
 dan (Num. xxxil, 3342; Josh. xili. 2g—32). 
 ‘These two portions made up the Holy Land, 
 of which the limits were recognized, with in- 
 considerable variations, till the final overthrow 
 of the Jewish polity. But in this verse the 
 utmost extent of Hebrew dominion, as it 
 existed in the time of David and Solo- 
 mon, is set forth. ‘The kingdom then reached 
 to Eloth and Ezion-geber on the lanitic 
 Gulf of the Red Sea (1 K. ix. 26), and to 
 Tiphsah on the ‘ River,” that is, the River 
 Euphrates (1 K. iv. 24), having for its western 
 boundary ‘‘ the Sea of the Philistines,” that is, 
 the Mediterranean, and for its southern boun= 
 dary ‘‘the desert,” that is, the wildernesses of 
 Shur and Paran (cf. Gen. xv. 18; Deut. i. 7, 
 xi. 24; Josh. i. 4). Hengstenberg thinks that 
 these broad descriptions of the Land are to be 
 taken as rhetorical, and not as-the strict 
 terms of the promise (‘ Pentateuch,’ II. p. 217). 
 He considers this to be the right way of meet- 
 ing those who reject the genuineness of the 
 narrative on the ground of the improbability 
 that Moses should have foretold the extent of 
 the conquests of David and Solomon. But 
 the cavils of such objectors may be met more 
 simply and effectively by urging that if Moses 
 
Vv. 32—7.] LONE Ur Sy. ee A Tao. LV, 355 
 chap. 34 32 7 Thou shalt make no covenant 3 1 And Moses came and told the 
 Deut. 7.2. with them, nor with their gods. people all the words of the Lorp, 
 
 | 33 They shall not dwell in thy and all the judgments: and all the 
 i land, lest they make thee sin against people answered with one voice, and 
 yDeut.7, me: for if thou serve their gods, “it said, * All the words which the Lorn ¢ ‘hap. 9. 
 
 Josh. 23, will surely be a snare unto thee. hath said will we do. ) & 24. 37. 
 53. And M eut. 5. 
 Made. o. 3: CHAPTER XXIV. 4 An oses wrote all the words 2,. 
 
 1 Moses is called up into the mountain. 3 The 
 people promise obedience. 4 Moses buildeth an 
 altar, and twelve pillars. 6 He sprinkleth the 
 blood of the covenant. 9 The glory of God 
 appeareth. 14 Aaron and Hur have the 
 charge of the people. 15 Moses goeth into the 
 mountain, where he continueth forty days and 
 Sorty nights. 
 
 ND he said unto Moses, Come 
 up unto the Lorp, thou, and 
 
 Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and se- 
 
 venty of the elders of Israel; and wor- 
 
 ship ye afar off. 
 
 2 And Moses alone shall come 
 near the Lorp: but they shall not 
 come nigh; neither shall the people 
 
 go up with him. 
 
 was acquainted with the geography of the 
 region (which can hardly be called in ques- 
 tion), he might certainly have foreseen that 
 the Hebrew power, when it became very 
 strong in the Land of Canaan, could not fail 
 to exercise domination over all the country 
 from the Euphrates to the Mediterranean and 
 the Red Sea. 
 
 Srar. AXIV. 
 
 The Sealing of the Covenant. 
 1—8. 
 
 1, 2. It is not easy to trace the proper 
 connection of these two verses as they stand 
 here. Ewald, with great probability, thinks 
 that their right place is between verses 8 and 
 9 in this chapter (‘ Hist. of Israel,’ p. 529).— 
 It has been suggested that they may relate to 
 what was said to Moses immediately after the 
 utterance of the Ten Commandments, ch. xx. 
 19 (Knobel).—If they are here placed in due 
 order of time (as Rosenmiiller, Keil and 
 others suppose), the direction to Moses con- 
 tained in them was delivered on the mount 
 (see xx. 21), but its fulfilment was deferred 
 till after he had come down from the mount 
 and done all that is recorded in vv. 3—8. 
 
 3,4. ‘The narrative in these verses seems 
 naturally to follow the end of the preceding 
 chapter. Moses leaves the mount and re- 
 peats the words of the Book of the Cove- 
 nant to the people, they give their assent, and 
 the next morning he arranges the ceremony 
 for the formal ratification of the Covenant. 
 
 of the Lorn, and rose up early in the 
 morning, and builded an altar under 
 the hill, and twelve pillars, according 
 to the twelve tribes of Israel. 
 
 5 And he sent young men of the 
 children of Israel, which offered burnt 
 offerings, and sacrificed peace offer- 
 ings of oxen unto the Lorp. 
 
 6 And Moses took half of the 
 blood, and put zt in basons; and half 
 of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. 
 
 7 And he took the book of the 
 
 covenant, and read in the audience of 
 
 the people: and they said, ? All that @ ver. 3. 
 
 the Lorp hath said will we do, and 
 be obedient. 
 
 4, twelve pillars| As the altar was a 
 symbol of the presence of Jehovah, so these 
 twelve pillars represented the presence of the 
 Twelve Tribes with whom He was making 
 the Covenant. Keil suggests that the pillars 
 were perhaps arranged as boundary stones 
 for the spot consecrated for the occasion. 
 
 5. young men of the children of Israel] ‘The 
 Targums and Saadia call these the firstborn 
 sons. ‘There is no fair ground for this inter- 
 pretation. Moses was on this occasion per- 
 forming the office of a priest (the family of 
 Aaron not being yet consecrated), and he 
 employed young men whose strength and skill 
 qualified them to slaughter and prepare the 
 sacrifices. The Law did not regard these acts 
 as necessarily belonging to the priests, and it is 
 probable that they were regarded in the same 
 Way in earlier times, when the sacerdotal 
 character belonged especially to the firstborn 
 sons. See on Lev.i. 5, and Exod. xxviii. 1. 
 
 burnt offerings...peace offerings| ‘The Burnt 
 offerings figured the dedication of the nation 
 to Jehovah, and the Peace offerings their 
 communion with Jehovah and with each 
 other. 
 
 6. he sprinkled] Rather, he cast. See on 
 Lev. i. 5. The same word is used wv. 8. 
 
 7. the book of the covenant] See wv. 4, 
 and Introd. note on xx. 22. The people had 
 to repeat their assent to the Book of the Cove- 
 nant before the blood was thrown upon them. 
 Cf. 2K, xxiii. 2, 213-2 Chron. xxxiv..30. 
 
 Z2 
 
356 
 
 8 And Moses took the blood, and 
 sprinkled zt on the people, and said, 
 
 erVet.1. Behold “the blood of the covenant, 
 Heb. 9. 20. Which the Lorp hath made with you 
 
 concerning all these words. 
 
 g9 @ Then went up Moses, and 
 Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and _se- 
 venty of the elders of Israel: 
 
 1o And they saw the God of Is- 
 
 8. the blood of the covenant| It should be 
 observed that the blood which sealed the Co- 
 venant was the blood of Burnt offerings and 
 Peace offerings. ‘The Sin offering had not yet 
 been instituted. ‘That more complicated view 
 of human nature which gave to the Sin offer- 
 ing its meaning, had yet to be developed by 
 the Law, which was now only receiving its 
 ratification. ‘The Covenant between Jehovah 
 and His people therefore took precedence of 
 the operation of the Law, by which came the 
 knowledge of sin. Rom. iii. 20; Note on the 
 Ten Commandments, § V. 
 
 Half of the blood had been put into basins, 
 and half of it had been cast upon the Altar. 
 The Book of the Covenant was then read, and 
 after that the blood in the basins was cast 
 ‘upon the people.” It was cast either upon 
 the elders, or those who stood foremost; or, 
 as Abarbanel and others have supposed, upon 
 the twelve pillars representing the ‘Twelve 
 Tribes, as the first half had been cast upon 
 the altar, which witnessed the presence of 
 Jehovah, The blood thus divided between 
 the two parties to the Covenant signified the 
 sacramental union between the Lord and His 
 people, Gf, Ps. 1 se Zech. ax. a1. 
 
 The instances from classical antiquity ad- 
 duced as parallels to this sacrifice of Moses 
 by Bahr, Knobel and Kalisch, in which ani- 
 mals were slaughtered on the making of co- 
 venants, are either those in which the animal 
 was slain to signify the punishment due to 
 the party that might break the covenant 
 WOW, sil II. 298, XIX. 2525 Civ. sadist, 
 I. 24, XXI. 45); those in which confederates 
 dipped their hands, or their weapons, in the 
 same blood (Aisch. ‘Sept. c. Theb.’ 43; 
 Xenoph. ‘Anab.’ 11. 2, § 9); or those in 
 which the contracting parties tasted each 
 other’s blood (Herodot. I. 74, Iv. 70; Tac. 
 ‘ Annal.’ xil. 47). All these usages are based 
 upon ideas which are but very superficially 
 related to the subject; they have indeed no 
 true connection whatever with the idea of 
 sacrifice as the seal of a covenant between 
 God and man, See on Ex. xxix. 20. 
 
 The Feast of the Peace offerings. 
 g—Il. 
 9. It would appear that Moses, Aaron 
 with his two sons, and seventy of the elders 
 
 PX ODS; 
 
 ene Ls 
 
 rael: and there was under his feet as 
 it were a paved work of a sapphire 
 stone, and as it were the body of 
 heaven in /zs clearness. 
 
 rr And upon the nobles of the 
 children of Israel he laid not his 
 hand: also they saw God, and did 
 eat and drink. 
 
 12 4 And the Lorp said unto Mo- 
 
 Ty, 8—r -# 
 
 (xix. 7) went a short distance up the moun- 
 tain to eat the meal of the Covenant (cf. 
 Gen. xxxi. 4347), which must have con- 
 sisted of the flesh of the Peace offerings 
 (v. 5.). Joshua is not named here, but he 
 accompanied Moses as his servant. See v. 13. 
 
 10. And they saw the God of Israel| As 
 they ate the sacrificial feast, the presence of 
 Jehovah was manifested to them with special 
 distinctness, In the act of solemn worship, 
 they perceived that he was present with them, 
 as their Lord and their Deliverer. It is idie 
 to speculate, as Keil and others have done, 
 on the mode of this revelation. ‘That no 
 visible form was presented to their bodily eyes, 
 we are expressly informed, Deut. iv. 12; see 
 On Xxxill. 20; cf. Isa. vi. 1. 
 
 there was under his feet as it were a paved 
 work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the 
 body of heaven in his clearness| Rather, under 
 His feet, it was like a work of bright sapphire 
 stone, and like the heaven itself tn clearness. 
 On the sapphire, see xxviii. 18; cf. Ezek. i. 
 26. ‘The pure blue of the heaven above them 
 lent its influence to help the inner sense to 
 realize the vision which no mortal eye could 
 behold. 
 
 11. he laid not his hand] i.e. he did not 
 smite them. It was believed that a mortal 
 could not survive the sight of God (Gen. 
 XXX. 30; Ex. xxxili. 20; Judg. vi. 22, xiii. 
 22): but these rulers of Israel were permitted 
 to eat and drink, while they were enjoying in 
 an extraordinary degree the sense of the 
 Divine presence, and took no harm. ‘* When 
 the heads of the people venture to draw near 
 their God, they find his presence no more a 
 source of disturbance and dread, but radiant 
 in all the bright loveliness of supernal glory; 
 a beautiful sign that the higher religion and 
 state of conformity to law, now established, 
 shall work onwards to eternal blessedness.” 
 Ewald, ‘ Hist. of Israel,’ Vol. 1. p. 529. 
 
 Moses goes up to receive the Tables. 
 12—18. 
 
 12. tables of stone, and a law, and com- 
 mandments| Maimonides and many of the 
 Jews understand the tables of stone to denote 
 the Ten Commandments; the /aw, the Law 
 written in the Pentateuch; and the command= 
 
 - 
 
v. 13—1.| 
 
 ses, Come up to me into the mount, 
 and be there: and I will give thee 
 tables of stone, and a law, and com- 
 mandments which I have written; 
 that thou mayest teach them. 
 
 13 And Moses rose up, and his 
 minister Joshua: and Moses went up 
 into the mount of God. 
 
 14 And he said unto the elders, 
 Tarry ye here for us, until we come 
 again unto you: and, behold, Aaron 
 and Hur are with you: if any man 
 have any matters to do, let him come 
 unto them. 
 
 15 And Moses went up into the 
 mount, and a cloud covered the 
 mount. 
 
 16 And the glory of the Lorp 
 
 abode upon mount Sinai, and the 
 
 ments (it should be the commandment), the 
 oral or traditional law which was in after 
 ages put into writing in the Mishna and the 
 Gemara. Ewald takes the words to mean 
 
 the Ten Commandments, and ‘‘ other sacred - 
 
 books of the Law” (‘ H. of I.’ I. p. 606). But 
 it is more probable that the Ten Command- 
 ments alone are spoken of, and that the mean- 
 ing is, the Tables of stone with the Law, even 
 the Commandment. So Knobel, Keil, Herx. 
 See Note on the Ten Commandments, § I. 
 
 that thou mayest teach them| More strictly, 
 to teach them. ‘The promise of the ‘Tables 
 is fulfilled after the directions for the ‘Taber- 
 nacle have been given, xxxi, 18. 
 
 13. Joshua] See on v. 9; cf. xxxil. 173 
 HXKUL. II, 
 
 mount of God] See on iil, 1. 
 
 14. It need not be supposed that the 
 Elders were required to remain on the very 
 spot where Moses parted with them, but 
 simply that they were to advance no further. 
 Aaron and Hur were to represent the autho- 
 rity of Moses during his absence. 
 
 15. Moses went up| Moses appears to have 
 left Joshua and gone up alone into the cloud, 
 Sev, 2 
 
 16. Cf. xix. 18 sq. 
 
 18. During this period of forty days, and 
 the second period when the Tables were re- 
 newed, Moses neither ate bread nor drank 
 water. Deut. ix. 9; Exod. xxxiv. 28. Elijah 
 in like manner fasted for forty days, when he 
 visited the same spot (x K. xix. 8). The 
 two who met our Saviour on the Mount of 
 Transfiguration, the one as representing the 
 Law, the other as representing the Prophets, 
 thus shadowed forth in their own experience 
 
 Pee CU ee ORY We V 
 
 ] 
 
 cloud covered it six days: and the 
 seventh day he called unto Moses out 
 of the midst of the cloud. 
 17 And the sight of the glory of 
 the Lorp was like devouring fire on 
 the top of the mount in the eyes of 
 the children of Israel. 
 
 18 And Moses went into the midst 
 of the cloud, and gat him up into the 
 
 mount: and “Moses was in the mount @ chap. 34. 
 28. 
 
 forty days and forty nights. 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 1 What the Israelites must offer for the making 
 of the tabernacle. 10 The form of the ark. 
 17 The mercy seat, with the cherubims. 23 
 The table, with the furniture thereof. 31 The 
 candlestick, with the instruments thereof. 
 
 ND the Lorp spake unto Mo- 
 
 ses, saying, 
 
 the Fast of Forty days in the wilderness of 
 Judea. 
 
 Tue ARK AND THE TABERNACLE. 
 CUAP XAV. AAV ES 
 
 Jehovah had redeemed the Israelites from 
 bondage. He had made a Covenant with them 
 and had given them a Law. He had pro- 
 mised, on condition of their obedience, to 
 accept them as His own ‘peculiar treasure,” 
 as ‘¢a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” 
 (xix. 5, 6). And now He was ready visibly 
 to testify that He made his abode with them. 
 He claimed to have a dwelling for Himself, 
 which was to be in external form a tent of 
 goats’ hair, to take its place among their own 
 tents, formed out of the same material (on 
 Ex. xxvi. 7). ‘The special mark of His pre- 
 sence within the Tent was to be the Ark or 
 chest containing the Ten Commandments on 
 two tables of stone (Ex. xxxi. 18), symbolizing 
 the divine Law of holiness, covered by the 
 Mercy seat, the type of reconciliation.— Moses 
 was divinely taught regarding the construc- 
 tion and arrangement of every part of the 
 Sanctuary. ‘The directions which were given 
 him are comprised in Ex, xxv. I—xxxl. II. 
 The account of the performance of the work, 
 expressed generally in the same terms, is given 
 Ex, xxxv. 20—xl. 33. 
 
 The meaning of the Tabernacle, with the 
 relation in which it stood to the Tables of 
 the Law, is considered more at length in the 
 Note at the end of ch. xl. 
 
 Cyap. XXV. 1—9. Moses is command- 
 ed to invite the people to bring their gifts for 
 the construction and service of the Sanctuary 
 and for the dresses of the Priests. 
 
 Ar 
 
 Deut. 9. 9. 
 
358 EXODUS. .XXV. ka 
 
 t Heb. 2, Speak unto the children of Israel, 
 fake for that they ‘bring me an 'offering: “of 
 
 me. 
 
 Or, eee A 
 fente of €VeLY man that giveth it willingly 
 
 fering. With his heart ye shall take my 
 @ chap. 35. fr : 
 4 offering. 
 
 2. an offering| ‘The Hebrew word is 
 térumah, which occurs here for the first time. 
 On the marginal rendering ‘“‘heave offering,” 
 see note on Ex. xxix. 27.. The word in this 
 place appears to denote no more than offering, 
 in its general sense, being equivalent to korban. 
 It is used with the same compass of meaning 
 EX, xxx, .13, xxxv. 5, &c. In Num. xvins24, 
 tithes are called a térumah. 
 
 that giveth it willingly with his heart| Liter- 
 ally, whose heart shall freely give it. 
 The public service of Jehovah was to be insti- 
 tuted by freewill offerings, not by an enforced 
 tax, Gh iy Chron. sx xix563-50, 01.45 eta a 
 68, 693 “a “COP. Wu. rT,91s, sos ie te 
 zeal with which the people responded to the 
 call, see Ex, xxxv. 21—29, XXxVl. 5—7. 
 
 my offering| ‘The recipient of the offering 
 is here denoted by the possessive case, accord- 
 ing to the common Hebrew idiom. Ex. xxx. 
 FE eS. pela Bagh hei WE 6 6 
 
 8. gold, and silver, and brass| ‘The sup- 
 ply of these metals possessed by the Israelites 
 at this time probably included what they had 
 inherited from their forefathers, what they had 
 obtained from the Egyptians (Ex. xii. 35), 
 and what may have been found amongst the 
 spoils of the Amalekites (Ex. xvii. 8—r3). 
 But with their abundant flocks and herds, it 
 can hardly be doubted that they had carried 
 on important traffic with the trading caravans 
 that traversed the wilderness, some of which, 
 most likely, in the earliest times were fur- 
 nished with silver, with the gold of Ophir 
 (or gold of Sheba, as it seems to have been 
 indifferently called), and with the bronze of 
 Pheenicia and Egypt (Gen. xxxvii. 25, 28; 
 Deut. xxxiti. 25; 1 K,1x. 28, x. 15; 1 Chron. 
 Xxix. 4; 2 Chron. ix. 14; Job xxii. 24, xxviii. 
 16; Ps. xlv. 9).—Cf. note on Ex. xxxviii. 24. 
 
 brass| ‘The Hebrew word néhosheth [see 
 on 2 K. xviii. 4] must mean pure copper in 
 such passages as Deut. viii. 9, Xxxlil. 25; 
 Job xxviii. 2. But it commonly denotes (as 
 it does most likely in this place) the hardened 
 alloy of copper and tin, more strictly called 
 bronze than brass, which was so largely used 
 for weapons and implements before the art of 
 working iron was well understood. On the 
 bronze of the Egyptians see Wilkinson’s 
 ‘Popular Account,’ Vol. I. p. 148, Il. p. 152, 
 and De Rougemont, ‘ Age du Bronze,’ p. 180. 
 The latter writer proves that the Egyptians 
 were well acquainted with bronze and with the 
 art of working in all the common metals, 
 
 3 And this zs the offering which ye 
 shall take of them; gold, and silver, 
 and brass, 
 
 4 And blue, and purple, and scarlet, 
 
 and 'fine linen, and goats’ hair, I Or, sith, 
 
 except iron, under the fourth dynasty, ages 
 before the time of Abraham. 
 
 4. blue, and purple, and scarlet} ‘The 
 names of the colours are used for the material 
 which was dyed with them. ‘The Jewish tra- 
 dition has been very generally received that 
 this material was wool. Cf. Heb. ix. 19 
 with Lev. xiv. 4, 49, &c. But the question 
 is not quite without difficulty. See on xxviii, 
 5, and Lev. xix. 19.—The material, having 
 been spun and dyed by the women, appears 
 to have been delivered in the state of yarn. 
 The Egyptians were well skilled in the art 
 of dyeing (Wilkinson, I. p. 83). ‘The weav- 
 ing and embroidering were left to Aholiab 
 and his assistants, Ex. xxxv., cf. v. 25 with 
 v. 33. The Egyptians in like manner used 
 to dye the threads of their stuffs before weav- 
 ing them, and to employ women in spinning, 
 and men in weaving and embroidering. (Wil- 
 kinson, ‘Ancient Egyptians,’ II. p. 79 sq.). 
 Respecting the names of the colours, see Note 
 at the end of the chapter. 
 
 fine linen] ‘The word shesh, which is here 
 used, is Egyptian (Birch in Bunsen’s ‘ Egypt,’ 
 Vol. v. p. 571). It is rendered by the LXX, 
 Bvcocos, which must be allied to butz, the 
 name of the “fine linen” of Syria, in Ezek, 
 Xxvil. 16, which was that used in the time of 
 Solomon for the hangings of the Temple and 
 for other purposes (1 Chron. xv. 27; 2 Chron, 
 lil, 14, lil. 14, v.12). That the word shesh 
 denoted the fine flax, or the manufactured 
 linen, for which Egypt was famous [see Ezek. 
 XXVll. 7, Where the original word is shésh: 
 but in Prov. vii. 16 ‘“‘fine linen of Egypt” is 
 a mistranslation, see note in loc.], and which 
 the Egyptians were in the habit of using for 
 dresses of state (Gen. xli. 42); and not cotton, 
 as some have imagined, nor si/k [as the word 
 shesh is rendered Prov. xxxi. 22, and in the 
 margin here and elsewhere], is now clearly 
 proved. Wilkinson, ‘Pop. Account,’ &c. 11. 
 p- 73, and his note to Herodot. 11. 86. The 
 linen cloth of Persia is mentioned, Esth. i. 6, 
 by its Persian name karpas (the parent of 
 kdptagcos and carbasus), which in our version 
 is wrongly rendered green, as the name of a 
 colour. ‘The occurrence of these three native 
 names, shesh, butz, and karpas, for the same 
 article produced in three different countries, 
 in strict consistency with the narratives in 
 which they occur, is worthy of remark, The 
 LXX. translates each of the three by B¥aaos. 
 Cf. notes on Ex, ix. 31, xxxix.28. The esti- 
 mation in which fine linen was held in differ- 
 
v. 5, 6.] 
 
 5 And rams’ skins dyed red, and 
 
 badgers’ skins, and shittim wood 
 Ade ) ) 
 
 ent ages, before silk was generally known, 
 may be seen r Chron. xv. 27; Prov. xxxi. 223 
 Ezek. xvi. 10, 13; Luke xvi. 19; Rev. xix. 8, 
 14. If silk is anywhere spoken of in the 
 Hebrew Bible, it is only in Ezek. xvi. 10, 
 where the word is not shesh but meshi, which 
 Fuerst thinks may be of Chinese derivation.— 
 It would seem that, for the use of the Taber- 
 nacle, the flax was spun by the women, like 
 the coloured wools, and was delivered in the 
 state of thread to be woven by Aholiab and 
 his assistants (Ex. xxxv. 25, 35). The fine 
 linen appears to have been used as the ground- 
 work of the figured curtains of the Taber- 
 nacle as well as of the embroidered hangings 
 of the Tent and the Court. See on xxxv. 35. 
 
 goats hair| ‘The hair of the goat has furnish- 
 ed the material for tents to the Roman armies 
 (Virg. ‘Georg.’ III. 313) and to the Arabs and 
 Eastern Nomads of all ages, as it did to the 
 Israelites in the wilderness. ‘The tent which 
 was to be the chosen dwelling-place of Je- 
 hovah was to be formed of the same material 
 as the tents of His people. See Introd. Note. 
 
 5. rams’ skins dyed red| ‘These skins may 
 have been tanned and coloured like the leather 
 now known as red morocco, which is said to 
 have been manufactured in Libya from the 
 remotest antiquity. On the manufacture of 
 leather by the Egyptians, see Wilkinson, ‘ Pop. 
 Account,’ II. pp. 102—I06. 
 
 badgers’ skins| ‘The skins here spoken of 
 were certainly not those of the badger, as was 
 supposed by Luther and Gesenius. ‘That 
 animal is often found in the Holy Land, but 
 it is very rare in the wilderness, if it exists 
 there at all (Tristram, ‘N. H.’ p. 44). The 
 Hebrew name here used, tachash, occurs in 
 the Old ‘Testament only in connection with 
 these skins, which were employed for the 
 outer covering of the Tent of the Tabernacle 
 (Ex. xxvi. 14), and in wrapping up the holy 
 things when they were moved (Num. iv. 8, ro, 
 &c.), and which are mentioned as the material 
 of the shoes of the prophetic impersonation of 
 Jerusalem by Ezekiel (xvi, 10). The word 
 bears a near resemblance to the Arabic tuchash, 
 which appears to be the general name given to 
 the seals, dugongs and dolphins found in the 
 Red Sea (Tristram), and, according to some 
 authorities, to the sharks and dog-fish (First), 
 The substance spoken of would thus appear 
 to have been leather formed from the skins of 
 marine animals, which was well adapted as a 
 protection against the weather. Pliny speaks 
 of tents made of seal skins as proof against the 
 stroke of lightning (‘H.N.’ II. 56), and one of 
 these is said to have been used by Augustus 
 whenever he travelled (Sueton. ‘Octav.’ go). 
 The skins of the dolphin and dugong are cut 
 
 _ produced in the wilderness. 
 
 EXODUS. XXV. 359 
 
 re) 
 
 6 Oil for the light, spices for an- 
 
 ointing oil, and for sweet incense, ’ 
 
 = 
 
 into sandals by the modern Arabs, and this 
 may explain Ezek. xvi. to. The question 
 seems thus to be determined on pretty certain 
 grounds. But it is remarkable that the LXX., 
 with Josephus, the Vulgate, the Targums, and 
 most of the ancient versions, treat the word 
 tachash as the name of ordinary leather, dis- 
 tinguished only by a particular colour. But 
 there is a difference as to whether the colour 
 was black, red, violet, or blue. Most of the 
 ancient authorities, followed by Bochart and 
 Rosenmiiller, imagine the colour to have been 
 hyacinthine, the first of the three colours in 
 the embroidered work of the Tabernacle [see 
 Note at the end of the Chapter]. From 
 Josephus speaking of the colour of these 
 skins, such as he conceived it to be, as like 
 the heavens (‘ Ant.’ 111. 6, § 4), we may infer 
 with confidence that he conceived Ayacinthine 
 to be sky-blue, [Note, § II.] 
 
 shittim wood| ‘The word shittim is the 
 plural form of shittah, which occurs as the 
 name of the growing tree Is, xli. 19. The tree 
 is satisfactorily identified with the Acacia 
 seyal, *‘a gnarled and thorny tree, somewhat 
 like a solitary hawthorn in its habit and man- 
 ner of growth, but much larger. [See note 
 on Ex. xxvi. r5.] It flourishes in the driest 
 situations, and is scattered more or less nume- 
 rously over the Sinaitic Peninsula” (Tristram). 
 It is rare in the Holy Land except in the 
 neighbourhood of the Dead Sea, where it 
 appears to have given its name to two places 
 in ancient times. See Num. xxv. 1; Joel iii. 
 18. It grows in Egypt in some regions at a 
 distance from the coast. ‘The timber is hard 
 and close-grained, of an orange colour with a 
 darker heart, well adapted for cabinet work. 
 The LXX. call it wood that will not rot, Evra 
 aonnra. It appears to be the only good wood 
 No other kind 
 of wood was employed in the Tabernacle or 
 its furniture. In the construction of the 
 ‘Temple cedar and fir took its place (1 K, v. 
 8, vi. 18; 2 Chron. ii. 8). A distinct species 
 of Acacia is mentioned by Dr Robinson, 
 Dr Royle and others, as 4. gummifera. But 
 Mr Tristram states that the gum arabic of 
 commerce is obtained from the 7, seya/, and 
 forms. an important article of traffic on the 
 shores of the Red Sea, as it did in ancient 
 times, See also Bunsen, v. 414. As the plural 
 form, shittim, is always applied to the 
 wood, never being used like the singular 
 shittah (Is. xli. 19) for the growing tree, the 
 conjecture will hardly stand that the plural 
 name is to be accounted for from ‘‘the 
 tangled thicket into which its stem expands,” 
 (Tristram ‘H, N.’ p. 390; Stanley, ‘S. and P.’ 
 p. 20; ‘Jewish Ch,’ I. p. 163; Houghton, 
 
“4 
 
 2) 
 
 60 
 
 Onyx stones, and stones to be set 
 
 ’ chap. 28. in the ?ephod, and in the “breastplate. 
 
 4e 
 € chap. 28. 
 15. 
 
 8 And let them make me a sanc- 
 tuary; that I may dwell among them. 
 g According to all that I shew thee, 
 after the pattern of the tabernacle, 
 
 1s GD SA PREV 
 
 [v. 7—10, 
 
 and the pattern of all the instruments 
 thereof, even so shall ye make /t. 
 
 10 @ “And they shall make an ark @ chap. 37. 
 
 . 
 
 of shittim wood: two cubits and a 
 
 half shall be the length thereof, and 
 a cubit and a half the breadth thereof, 
 
 ‘Smith’s Dict.’ 11. 1295; Royle, ‘ Kitto’s 
 Cycl.’ 111. 841.) See also on Ex. iii. 2. 
 
 6. Oil for the light] The oil was to be 
 ‘‘pure olive oil beaten,” see on Ex, xxvii. 20, 
 
 spices for anointing oil| What these spices 
 were see Ex. Xxx. 22—25. 
 
 sweet incense] See Ex. xxx, 34, 35. 
 
 7. On the materials and construction of 
 the ephod and breastplate, see ch, xxviii. 
 
 8. sanctuary] Heb. mikdash, i.e. a hallow- 
 ed place. This is the most comprehensive 
 of the words that relate to the place dedi- 
 cated to Jehovah. It included the Tabernacle 
 with its furniture, its Tent and its Court. 
 
 that I may dwell among them] ‘Yhe pur- 
 pose of the Sanctuary is here definitely declared 
 by the Lord Himself. It was to be the con- 
 stant witness of His presence amongst His 
 people. xxix. 42—46, xl. 34—38, &c. 
 
 9. According to all that I shew thee| ‘The 
 Tabernacle and all that pertained to it were 
 to be in strict accordance with the ideas re- 
 vealed by the Lordto Moses: nothing inthe way 
 of form or decoration was to be left to the taste 
 or judgment of the artificers. ‘The command 
 is emphatically repeated v. 40, xxvi. 30; cf. 
 Acts vil. 44; Heb. vil. 5.—The word here 
 translated pattern is also used in Chronicles 
 to denote the plans for the Temple which 
 were given by David to Solomon (z Chron, 
 XXVllil. II, 12, 19); it is elsewhere rendered 
 form, likeness, similitude, Deut. iv. 16, 17; 
 Ezek, viii. 3, 10. The revelation to the mind 
 of Moses was, without doubt, such as to 
 suggest the exact appearance of the work to 
 be produced. But there is no need to adopt 
 the materialistic notion of some of the rabbin- 
 ists, that a T'abernacle in the heavens was set 
 forth before the bodily eyes of the Legislator. 
 
 the tabernacle} ‘The Hebrew word hsam- 
 mishkan, signifies the dwelling-place. It here 
 denotes the wooden structure, containing the 
 holy place and the most holy place, with the 
 tent which sheltered it. See on xxvi. 1. 
 
 The Ark of the Covenant. 
 XXV. Io—16 (cf. xxxvil. I—5). 
 
 The ARK is uniformly designated in Exo- 
 dus the ARK OF THE TESTIMONY (xxv. 22, 
 XXVie 34, XXX. 6, 26, Xxxl. 7, xl. 3, &c.); 
 it is so called also Num. iv. 5, vil. 89; Josh. 
 iv. 16; it is called simply THE ‘TESTIMONY 
 HX /XVi. 134; SRVilyl SL Mets A VEs. 135 °XXIV, 3° 
 ‘Num, xvil.:z104 .But/in Num, ‘x. 33 it is 
 
 named THE ARK OF THE COVENANT, and 
 this is its most frequent name in Deuterono- 
 my and the other books of the Old Testament. 
 In some places it is named THE ARK OF THE 
 LorD (Josh. iii. 13, iv. 11, vii. 6; 1 S. iv. 6; 
 2S. vi. 9, &c.), THE ARK OF Gop (1 §. iii. 
 3, IV. 11, v. 1, &¢.), THE ARR ooeeiEs 
 STRENGTH OF THE LORD (2 Chron. vi. 41; 
 Ps, cxxxil, 8), and THE HOLY ARK (2 Chron, 
 Xxxv, 3). Cf, note on v. 16. 
 
 The Ark of the Covenant was the central 
 point of the Sanctuary. It was designed to 
 contain the Testimony (xxv. 16, xl. 20; Deut. 
 Xxxl, 26), that is, the Tables of the Divine 
 Law, the terms of the Covenant between 
 Jehovah and His people: and it was to sup- 
 port the Mercy seat with its Cherubim, from 
 between which He was to hold communion 
 with them (Ex, xxv. 22). On this account, 
 in these directions for the construction of the 
 Sanctuary, it is named first of all the parts. 
 But on the other hand, in the narrative of 
 the work as it was actually carried out, we 
 find that it was not made till after the ‘Taber- 
 nacle (Ex. xxxvii, 1—9). It was more suitable 
 that the receptacle should be first provided 
 to receive and shelter the most sacred of the 
 contents of the Sanctuary as soon as it was 
 completed. The practical order of the works 
 seems to be given in Ex, xxxi. 7—10, and 
 XXXV, I1—19.—On the Golden Altar, see on 
 xxx. r.—The completion of the Ark is re- 
 corded xxxvii. r—5. On its history, see con- 
 cluding note on ch. xl. 
 
 10. anark| The Hebrew name is aron, 
 which means a box, or coffer (Gen. 1. 26; 
 2 K. xil. 9, 10; 2 Chro, xxiv. 8, &c.). The 
 word ark exactly answers to it; but our trans- 
 
 lators have employed the same to render quite” 
 
 a different word (t@bah), which is used nowhere 
 in the Hebrew Bible except to denote what 
 we familiarly call ‘‘ the ark” of Noah, and the 
 ‘“ark of bulrushes” (Gen. vi. 143 Ex. ii. 3). 
 In the first instance, there is the same confu- 
 sion in both the LXX. and the Vulgate, but 
 not in the latter one. The word tébah is 
 Fgyptian, having nearly the same meaning. 
 See on Ex. i. 3—T aking the cubit at eighteen 
 inches (see on Gen. vi. 15), the Ark of the 
 Covenant was a box 3ft. gin. long, 2 ft. 3in. 
 wide, and 2ft. 3in. deep. 
 
 of shittim wood] It is well observed that 
 if the Ark, which appears to have been pre- 
 served till the destruction of Jerusalem (2 
 Chro. xxxv. 3; Jer. iii, 16), had originated 
 
v. 11—16,] 
 
 and a cubit and a half the height 
 thereof. 
 
 rr And thou shalt overlay it with 
 pure gold, within and without shalt 
 thou overlay it, and shalt make upon 
 it a crown of gold round about. 
 
 12 And thou shalt cast four rings 
 of gold for it, and put them in the four 
 corners thereof; and two rings shall 
 be in the one side of it, and two rings 
 in the other side of it. 
 
 EXODUS. XXV. 
 
 13 And thou shalt make staves of 
 shittim wood, and overlay them with 
 gold. 
 
 14 And thou shalt put the staves 
 into the rings by the sides of the ark, 
 that the ark may be borne with them. 
 
 15 Ihe staves shall be in the rings 
 of the ark: they shall not be taken 
 from it. 
 
 16 And thou shalt put into the ark 
 the testimony which I shall give thee. 
 
 in Palestine, it would not have been made of 
 shittim wood, the wood of the Wilderness 
 (see on v. 5), but either of oak, the best 
 wood of the Holy Land, or of cedar, which 
 took the place of shittim wood in the con- 
 struction of the Temple (Stanley, ‘ Jewish 
 Church,’ I. p. 163). 
 
 11. overlay it with pure gold| Accord- 
 ing to the rabbinists, the Ark was lined and 
 covered with plates of gold. But there is no- 
 thing in the original which might not aptly 
 denote the common process of gilding. ‘The 
 Egyptians in early times were acquainted with 
 both the art of gilding and that of covering 
 a substance with thin plates of gold. (Wilkin- 
 SOns ni Op, Acc. 11.145.) 
 
 a crown of gold| ‘That is, an edging or 
 moulding of gold round the top of the Ark, 
 within which the cover or Mercy seat (v. 17) 
 Mavemawe titted (ci. Ex, xxxvil. 2). There 
 were golden mouldings, called by the same 
 name, to the Table of Shewbread (v.24, Xxxvil. 
 11, 12) and to the Golden Altar (xxx. 3, 
 Xxxvlil. 26). ‘The Heb. word xeer signifies, 
 according to its etymology, a band, or cinc- 
 ture, and is naturally applied to a crown. 
 Our Version in here rendering it crown, 
 follows the Vulgate and some other ancient 
 Versions. But the renderings of the LXX., 
 Josephus, the Targums, Luther, de Wette, 
 Zunz, Wogue, &c., more nearly agree with 
 our word moulding, i.e. asmall cornice, and 
 this answers to the radical meaning of zeer 
 as well as crown does. See Reland, ‘De 
 Spoliis Templi,’ c. vi. 
 
 12. four corners thereof| Rather, its 
 four bases, or feet. The Hebrew sub- 
 stantive is rendered corners in most of the 
 ancient versions. But the LXX. have kXiry 
 (which appears to be rather vaguely used to 
 denote extremities, cf. vv. 12, 19), and there 
 seems no doubt that the original means feet 
 (Aben-Ezra, Abarbanel, Gesen., Ftirst, Kno- 
 bel, &c.). ‘The word may possibly denote the 
 lowest part of each corner: but it is not un- 
 likely that there were low blocks, or plinths, 
 placed under the corners to which the rings 
 were attached (see on v..26), and that it is to 
 
 them the word is here applied. The Ark, 
 when it was carried, must thus have been raised 
 above the shoulders of the bearers. ‘The rings 
 of the Golden Altar were placed immediately 
 under the golden moulding (xxx. 4); but 
 those of the Table of Shewbread were fasten- 
 ed to the feet of the four legs. It has been 
 imagined by some Jewish and other authori- 
 ties that the Ark was raised on high when it 
 was carried in order to display the most sacred 
 symbol of the Sanctuary. But we may infer, 
 from there being a similar arrangement of the 
 rings on the Table of Shewbread, as well as 
 from the distinctive character of the Ark 
 itself, that this could not have been the case. 
 The Ark of the Covenant of Jehovah was 
 never carried about like the arks of the gen- 
 tile nations, for display. See Note at the 
 end of chap. xl. 
 
 15. they shall not be taken from it| ‘This 
 direction was probably given in order that 
 the Ark might not be touched by the hand 
 (cf. 2 S. vi. 6). There is no similar direction 
 regarding the staves of the Tabernacle of Shew- 
 bread (v. 27), those of the Golden Altar (xxx. 
 5), nor those of the Altar of Burnt offering 
 (xxvii. 7). ‘These were of less sanctity than 
 the Ark and might be touched.—The for- 
 mula in Num. iv. 6, 8, 11, 14, as it is ren- 
 dered in our version, may seem to contradict 
 the direction here given in regard to the Ark. 
 But it might rather be translated in a more 
 general sense, as, put the staves in order 
 (see note in loc.). 
 
 16. the testimony which I shall give thee] 
 The stone Tables of the Ten Command- 
 ments) (Ex. xxiv, 02, )Xxxi,. 18, xxxiv. 1,28) 
 are called the Testimony, or, the Tables of 
 the Testimony (xxxi. 18, Xxxil. 15, XXXiv. 
 29), aS the Ark which contained them is 
 called the Ark of the Testimony (see Introd.), 
 and the Tabernacle in which the Ark was 
 placed, the Tabernacle of the Testimony (Ex. 
 XXXViiil. 21; Num. i. 50, &c.); they are also 
 called the Tables of the Covenant (Ex. xxxiv. 
 28; Deut. ix. 9, 11, 15), as the Ark is called 
 the Ark of the Covenant. The meaning 
 of the latter name admits of no doubt: the 
 
 am 
 
©» 
 
 “= 
 
 PRO Dies ew KN [v. 17—20. 
 
 end, and the other cherub on the other 
 
 end: even' of the mercy seat shall ye '0r, 
 make the cherubims on the two ends ter of rie 
 thereof. Merc 4 
 
 17 And thou shalt make a mercy 
 seat of pure gold: two cubits and a 
 half sha/l be the length thereof, and 
 a cubit and a half the breadth there- 
 
 seat, 
 
 of, 
 
 18 And thou shalt make two che- 
 rubims of gold, of beaten work shalt 
 thou make them, in the two ends of 
 the mercy seat. 
 
 1g And make one cherub on the one 
 
 Ten Commandments contained ‘‘the word 
 of the Covenant” between Jehovah and His 
 people (Ex. xxxiv. 28; Deut. iv. 13). But there 
 has been a difference regarding the interpre- 
 tation of the former name, which derives 
 additional importance from its being the 
 name used here and in ch. xl. 20 in imme- 
 diate connection with the first placing of the 
 Tables within the Ark and under the Mercy 
 seat. ‘The reasons for taking the word Tes- 
 timony, in its application to the Ten Com- 
 mandments, as signifying the direct testi- 
 mony of Jehovah against sin in man, and thus 
 bringing it into connection with Deut. xxxi. 
 26, 27, is given elsewhere. See Note on the 
 Ten Commandments, after ch. xx. 21. 
 
 The Mercy Seat. 
 XXV. 17—22. (Cf. xxxvil. 6—9.) 
 
 17. a mercy seat of pure gold| In ex- 
 ternal form, the Mercy seat was a plate of 
 gold with the cherubim standing on it, the 
 whole beaten out of one solid piece of metal 
 (XXXvll. 7); it was placed upon the Ark and so 
 took the place of a cover. Its Hebrew name 
 is kapporeth, and on the true meaning of this 
 word there is a very important difference of 
 opinion. ‘The greater number of recent trans- 
 lators and critics, Jewish and others, with the 
 Arabic amongst the ancient versions, render it 
 as simply cover. Our version, following the 
 general voice of antiquity, with Luther, Cran- 
 mer, and others of the early translators in 
 modern languages, gives, as we believe, the 
 truer rendering, calling it the Mercy seat. 
 [See Note at the end of the chapter. ] 
 
 18—20. ‘The way in which the Cheru- 
 bim of the Mercy seat are here mentioned, 
 with reference to their faces, wings and 
 posture, is in favour of the common Jewish 
 tradition (Otho, ‘Rabb. Lex.’ p, 129), that 
 they were human figures, each having two 
 wings. ‘They must have been of small size, 
 proportioned to the area of the Mercy seat, 
 On the other notices of Cherubim in the 
 Scriptures, see Note on Gen, iii. 24. Com- 
 paring the different references to form in this 
 place, in 2 Sam, xxii. rz (Ps. xviii. ro), in 
 Ezek, ch, i., x. and in Rev. ch. iv., it would 
 appear that the name Cherub was applied to 
 various combinations of animal forms. Similar 
 
 20 And the cherubims shall stretch 
 forth their wings on high, covering the 
 mercy seat with their wings, and their 
 faces shall look one to another; to- 
 ward the mercy seat shall the faces 
 of the cherubims be. 
 
 combinations were made by most ancient 
 peoples in order to represent conceivable 
 combinations of powers, such as are denied 
 to man in his earthly state of existence, It 
 is remarkable that amongst the Egyptians, 
 the Assyrians and the Greeks, as well as the 
 Hebrews, the creatures by very far most 
 frequently introduced into these composite 
 figures, were man, the ox, the lion, and the 
 eagle. ‘These are evidently types of the most 
 important and familiarly known classes of 
 living material beings. ‘The rabbinists recog- 
 nized this in the Cherubim as described by 
 Ezekiel, which they regarded as representing 
 the whole creation engaged in the worship 
 and service of God (Schoettgen, ‘ Hor, Heb.’ 
 p. 1108). Cf, Rev. iv. 9—11, v. 13. It 
 would be in harmony with this view to sup- 
 pose that the more strictly human shape of 
 the Cherubim of the Mercy seat represented 
 the highest form of created intelligence en- 
 gaged in the devout contemplation of the 
 divine Law of love and justice. Cf. 1 Pet. 
 i. 12. ‘They were thus symbols of worship 
 rendered by the creature in the most exalted 
 condition (See Augustin. ‘ Quest. in Exod.’ 
 Cv.),—It is worthy of notice that the golden 
 Cherubim from between which Jehovah spoke 
 to His people bore witness, by their place on 
 the Mercy seat, to His redeeming mercy ; 
 while the Cherubim that took their stand 
 with the flaming sword at the gate of Eden, 
 to keep the way to the tree of life, witnessed 
 to His condemnation of sin in man, The 
 most perfect finite intelligence seems thus to 
 be yielding assent to the divine Law in its 
 twofold manifestation, 
 
 18. ofbeaten work] i.e. elaborately wrought 
 with the hammer. 
 
 19. even of the mercy seat| Rather, out 
 of the Mercy seat. ‘The sense appears to 
 be that the Cherubim and the Mercy seat 
 were to be wrought out of one mass of gold. 
 (Cf. xxxvii. 7.) ‘This meaning agrees with 
 Onkelos, Saadia, and most modern interpreters. 
 But the LXX., Vulg. and Syr. translate the 
 words in question as if the second clause of 
 the verse were, in sense, only a repetition of 
 the first clause, 
 
 20. Seeon vw. 18. 
 
Vi 21—26.] 
 
 21 And thou shalt put the mercy 
 seat above upon the ark; and in the 
 ark thou shalt put the testimony that 
 I shall give thee. 
 
 22 And there I will meet with thee, 
 and I will commune with thee from 
 
 ‘Numb.7. above the mercy seat, from “between 
 
 the two cherubims which are upon 
 the ark of the testimony, of all things 
 which I will give thee in command- 
 ment unto the children of Israel. 
 23 4 /7Thou shalt also make a table 
 _of shittim wood: two cubits shall be 
 the length thereof, and a cubit the 
 
 21. the testimony] See on v. 16. Cf. xl. 20. 
 22. I will commune with thee] See Note 
 on the Ten Commandments, § V. 
 
 The Table of Shewbread. 
 23—30. (Cf. xxxvil. 1o—16.) 
 
 23. a table of shittim wood| ‘This Table 
 is one of the most prominent objects in the 
 triumphal procession sculptured in relief on the 
 Arch of Titus. The most important of the 
 sculptures of the Arch were carefully copied 
 under the direction of Reland in 1710. Since 
 that time they have gone on to decay, so that 
 the engravings of them in his work ‘De Spo- 
 liis —Templi,’ &c., are now of great interest 
 and value. Reland has interpreted the sculp- 
 tures with his accustomed learning and 
 sagacity. 
 
 / — f 
 
 ( bx 
 
 <e4 
 — = aes 
 
 = i ema "I wane 
 WQS Th NBS 
 
 \ 
 ‘ \ : = Em Wye ot ce a ae a 
 
 The Shewbread Table with its incense cups and the 
 two Silver Trumpets (Num. x. 2). 
 
 The Table which is here represented could 
 not, of course, have been the one made for 
 the Tabernacle. The original Ark of the Tes- 
 timony was preserved until it disappeared 
 when Jerusalem was captured by the Baby- 
 lonians: it was never replaced by an Ark of 
 more modern construction. See concluding 
 note on ch, xl. But the Shewbread Table, the 
 
 1g ACAD AGES BDA). iu 
 
 breadth thereof, and a cubit and a half 
 the height thereof. 
 
 24 And thou shalt overlay it with 
 pure gold, and make thereto a crown 
 of gold round about. 
 
 25 And thou shalt make unto it a 
 border of an hand breadth round 
 about, and thou shalt make a golden 
 crown to the border thereof round 
 about. 
 
 26 And thou shalt make for it four 
 rings of gold, and put the rings in the 
 four corners that are on the four feet 
 thereof. 
 
 Golden Altar, and the Golden Candlestick, 
 were renewed by Solomon for the Temple. 
 Of the Candlestick, ten copies were then made. 
 (1 K. vii. 48, 49; 2 Chro. iv. 19). From the 
 omission of them amongst the spoils carried 
 home from Babylon (Ezra i. g—11) we may 
 infer that the Table and the Golden Altar 
 with a single Candlestick were re-made by 
 Zerubbabel (see 1 Macc. i. 21, 22), and again 
 by the Maccabees (1 Macc. iv. 49). ‘There 
 cannot therefore be a doubt that the Table 
 and the Candlestick figured on the Arch are 
 those of the Maccabzan times: and it must 
 have been these which are described, and 
 must have been seen, by Josephus (‘ Ant.’ 
 Il. 6. §6, 7; ‘B. J.’ vil. 5. § 5). It is however 
 most likely that the restorations were made 
 as nearly as possible after the ancient models. 
 In representing the ‘Table it will be seen that 
 the sculptor has exhibited its two ends, in 
 defiance of perspective. ‘The details and size 
 of the figure, and the description of Jose- 
 phus, appear to agree very nearly with the 
 directions here given to Moses, and to illus- 
 trate them in several particulars. Josephus 
 says that the Table was like the so-called 
 Delphic tables, richly ornamented pieces of 
 furniture in use amongst the Romans, which 
 were sometimes, if not always, covered with 
 gold or silver (Martial, x11. 67; Cicero, ‘in 
 Verr.’Iv. 59; cf. Du Cange, Art. ‘ Delphica’). 
 
 24. overlay it] See ony, II. 
 
 a crown of gold| Rather, a moulding 
 of gold. See on v.11. The moulding of 
 the Table is still seen at the ends of the 
 sculptured figure. 
 
 25. a border] Rather a framing, which 
 reached from leg to leg so as to make the 
 Table firm, as well as to adorn it with a second 
 moulding of gold. Two fragments of such a 
 framing are still seen in the sculpture attached 
 to the legs half-way down. 
 
 26. in the four corners that are on the four 
 feet thereof | ‘The word here rendered feet is 
 
 26 
 
 4 
 
 o 
 
364 
 
 27 Over against the border shall 
 the rings be for places of the staves to 
 bear the table. 
 
 28 And thou shalt make the staves 
 of shittim wood, and overlay them with 
 gold, that the table may be borne with 
 them. 
 
 29 And thou shalt make the dishes 
 
 thereof, and spoons thereof, and covers 
 
 the common name for the feet of men or 
 animals. Josephus says that the feet of the 
 Table were like those that the Dorians used 
 to put to their couches, which appear to have 
 been famous for their splendour (lian, ‘ Var. 
 Hist.’ xl. 29; Athenzus, I. 47). Comparing 
 this with the sculpture, it would seem that the 
 legs terminated in something like the foot of 
 an animal, such as in modern furniture is 
 called a claw. ‘The like device often occurs 
 in the ancient Egyptian furniture (Wilkinson, 
 I. pp. 59, 60, 62, &c.). ‘The word here ren- 
 dered corner is not the same as that so rendered 
 in v. 12, and it may denote any extreme part. 
 We might thus render the words, upon the 
 four extremities thatare atthe four 
 feet. Josephus speaks of the rings as having 
 been in part attached to the claws themselves. 
 But there is no trace of the rings in the 
 sculpture. 
 
 27. Over against the border] Rather, 
 Over against the framing; that is, the 
 rings were to be placed not upon the framing 
 itself, but at the extremities of the legs an- 
 swering to each corner of it. 
 
 29. dishes} ‘The Hebrew word is the 
 same as is employed to denote the large silver 
 vessels which were filled with fine flour and 
 formed part of the offerings of the Princes of 
 Israel in Num. vii. 13 sq., where it is rendered 
 chargers. According to its probable etymo- 
 logy, it denoted a deep vessel, and therefore 
 neither of the English words answers well to 
 it: perhaps dow/s would be nearer the mark, 
 Knobel conjectures that these vessels, which 
 belonged to the Shewbread Table, were used 
 to bring the bread into the Sanctuary; but it 
 is hard to imagine that vessels of sufficient 
 size for such a purpose (Lev. xxiv. 5) were 
 formed of gold. ‘They may possibly have 
 been the measures for the meal used in the 
 loaves. 
 
 spoons| ‘The Hebrew word is that used 
 for the small gold cups that were filled with 
 frankincense in the offerings of the Princes, 
 Num. vii. 148q. The LXX. render it @vioxa 
 =incense cups. See on Lev. xxiv. 7. These 
 must be the only vessels which are mentioned 
 by Josephus in connection with the ‘Table— 
 dvo piddae xpvoeat AySavwrod mAnpecs (* Ant.’ 
 
 EES OD Sex OVE 
 
 [v. 27-31. 
 
 a | 
 
 5 
 
 thereof, and bowls thereof, 'to cover "9, 
 to pour out 
 
 withal: of pure gold shalt thou make wittaz, 
 
 them. | 
 30 And thou shalt set upon the 
 
 table shewbread before me alway. » 
 
 $ 
 
 | 
 
 31 4 £And thou shalt make a can- £ chap. 37. 
 
 dlestick of pure gold: of beaten work 7 
 
 shall the candlestick be made: his 
 shaft, and his branches, his bowls, his 
 
 Ill. c. 6. § 6. c. r0. § 7), and which are re- 
 presented on the Table in the sculpture. 
 
 covers...bowls| According to the best au- 
 thority these were flagons and chalices, 
 such as were used for Drink offerings. LX X. 
 orovdeia and kvabor. See the next note. 
 
 to cover withal| More correctly rendered 
 in the margin, to pour out withal. It is strange 
 that our translators in the text should have left 
 Luther and Cranmer, backed as they are by 
 the LX X., the Vulg., the Syriac, the Targums, 
 and the most direct sense of the original words, 
 to follow Saadia and the Talmud. With 
 the exception of some recent Jewish versions, 
 the best modern authorities apply the pas- 
 sage, along with the two last names of vessels, 
 to the rite of the Drink offering, which ap- 
 pears to have regularly accompanied every Meat 
 offering (Lev. xxiil. 18; Num. vi. 15, Xxviil. 14, 
 &c.). The subject is important in its bearing 
 upon the meaning of the Shewbread: the cor- 
 rected rendering of the words tends to shew 
 that it was a true Meat offering [see on Lev. 
 xxiv. 9].—The first part of the verse might 
 thus be rendered;—And thou shalt make 
 its bowls and its incense-cups and 
 its flagons and its chalices for pour- 
 ing out the Drink offerings. 
 
 30. The Shewbread Table was placed in 
 the Holy Place on the north side (xxvi. 35). 
 Directions for preparing tie Shewbread are 
 given in Lev. xxiv. s—g. It consisted of twelve 
 large cakes of unleavened bread, which were 
 arranged on the Table in two piles, with a 
 golden cup of frankincense on each pile (Jos. 
 ‘Ant.’ III. ro. § 7). It was renewed every 
 Sabbath day. ‘The stale loaves were given to 
 the priests, and the frankincense appears to 
 have been lighted on the Altar for a memorial 
 [see on Lev. ii. 2]. We may presume that the 
 Drink offering was renewed at the same time. 
 The Shewbread, with all the characteristics 
 and significance of a great national Meat offer- 
 ing, in which the twelve tribes were repre- 
 sented by the twelve cakes, was to stand 
 before Jehovah perpetually, in token that He 
 was always graciously accepting the good 
 works of His people, for whom Atonement 
 had been made by the victims offered on the 
 Altar in the Court of the Sanctuary [see notes 
 on Lev. xxiv. s—9g]. 
 
Rt 25)33-| 
 
 knops, and his flowers, shall be of the 
 same. 
 
 32, And six branches shall come out 
 of the sides of it; three branches of 
 the candlestick out of the one side, and 
 three branches of the candlestick out 
 of the other side: 
 
 aes OUR se Vi 
 
 33 Three bowls made like unto 
 almonds, with a knop and a flower in 
 one branch; and three bowls made 
 like almonds in the other branch, with 
 a knop and a flower: so in the six 
 branches that come out of the candle- 
 stick, 
 
 The Golden Candlestick. 
 31—39. (Cf. xxxvli. 17—24). 
 
 31. acandlestick of pure gold ‘This would 
 more properly be called a lamp-stand than a 
 candlestick. Its purpose was to support seven 
 oil-lamps. Like the Shewbread ‘Table, it is a 
 prominent object amongst the spoils of the 
 ‘Temple sculptured on the Arch of ‘Titus. 
 This figure is copied from Reland [see on 
 U; 23 |. 
 
 Vile Yip. 
 
 I) Midi 
 
 a, 
 x 
 
 Ay . 
 
 AWG 
 
 The size of the Candlestick is nowhere men-: 
 tioned: but we may form an estimate of it by 
 comparing the figure with that of the Table. 
 It is most likely that the two objects are re- 
 presented on the same scale. Its height ap- 
 pears to have been about three feet, and its 
 width two feet. ‘The details of the sculpture 
 usefully illustrate the description in the text. 
 But the work and form of the pedestal here 
 represented are not in accordance with Jewish 
 taste or usage at any period. Reland con- 
 jectures that the original foot may have been 
 broken off, and lost or stolen when the 
 Candlestick was taken out of the Temple, 
 
 and that the pedestal in the sculpture was 
 added by some Roman artist to set off 
 the trophy. ‘There are other ancient re- 
 presentations of the Candlestick on gems, 
 in tombs, and on the walls of synagogues. 
 Some of these are copied in Reland’s work, 
 and one has lately been discovered by Capt. 
 Wilson in a ruined synagogue in the valley 
 of the Jarmuk. In most of them the stem 
 is supported on three feet, or claws. ‘This 
 arrangement however is supposed to contra- 
 dict Josephus, who says that the stem rose 
 from a pedestal: the word he uses (Bars) is 
 however not quite free from ambiguity. In 
 general form the other figures of the Candle- 
 stick copied by Reland nearly agree with that 
 on the arch except in the limbs being more 
 slender, in which particular they are coun- 
 tenanced by the description in Josephus (‘B. 
 J. vil. 5.§ 5). It is likely that the sculptor 
 may have thickened the limbs in his work to 
 give them better effect from the point of view 
 from which spectators would see them. 
 
 of beaten work| See on v. 18. 
 
 his shaft, and his branches, his bowls, his 
 knops, and his flowers| ‘This might rather be 
 rendered, its base, its stem, its flower 
 cups [see next verse], its knobs, and its 
 lilies. 
 
 33. Three bowls made like unto almonds] 
 More strictly, three cups of almond 
 flowers. ‘These appear to be the cups in 
 immediate contact with the knobs as shewn 
 in the sculpture. 
 
 a flower| Most of the old versions render 
 the word as a lily, and this rendering well 
 agrees with the sculpture. 
 
 the candlestick| Here, and in the two follow- 
 ing verses, the word appears to denote the 
 stem, as the essential part of the Candlestick. 
 It would seem from vv. 33—35 that the orna- 
 mentation of the Candlestick consisted of uni- 
 form members, each comprising a series of an 
 almond flower, a knob and a lily; that the , 
 stem comprised four of these members; that 
 each pair of branches was united to the stem 
 at one of the knobs; and that each branch 
 comprised three members. In comparing the 
 description in the text with the sculptured 
 figure, allowance may be made for some 
 deviation in the sculptor’s copy, which was 
 pardonable enough, considering the purpose 
 for which the representation was made, 
 
66 
 34 And in the candlestick shall be 
 
 four bowls made like unto almonds, 
 with their knops and their flowers. 
 
 35 And there shall be a knop under 
 two branches of the same, and a knop 
 under two branches of the same, anda 
 knop under two branches of the same, 
 according to the six branches that pro- 
 ceed out of the candlestick. 
 
 36 Their knops and their branches 
 shall be of the same: all it sha// be one 
 beaten work of pure gold. 
 
 37. seven lamps] These lamps were proba- 
 bly like those used by the Egyptians and other 
 nations, shallow covered vessels more or less of 
 an oval form, with a mouth at one end from 
 which the wick protruded. This may help 
 us to the simplest explanation of the rather 
 obscure words, ‘‘that they may give light 
 over against it.””. The Candlestick was placed 
 on the south side of the Holy Place (xxvi. 35), 
 with the line of lamps parallel with the wall, 
 or, according to Josephus, somewhat oblique- 
 ly. If the wick-mouths of the lamps were 
 turned outwards, they would give light over 
 against the Candlestick; that is, towards the 
 north side [see Num. viii. 2]. 
 
 37. they shall light] See marginal render- 
 ing and note on Lev. xxiv. 2. 
 
 38. the tongs] ‘The Hebrew word is the 
 same as in Is. vi. 6. The small tongs for the 
 lamps were used to trim and adjust the wicks. 
 
 the snuff-dishes| ‘These were shallow vessels 
 used to receive the burnt fragments of wick 
 removed by the tongs. ‘The same Hebrew 
 word is translated, in accordance with its 
 connection, fire pans, XXVil. 3, XXXVili. 3; and 
 censers, Num. iv. 14, xvi. 6, &c. .For the 
 regulations respecting the Priests’ tending the 
 lamps, see XxvVil. 20, 21, xxx. 8; Lev, xxiv. 
 2—4 (with the note); 2 Chro. xiii. 11. 
 
 39. atalent of pure gold| Amongst the dis- 
 
 crepant estimates of the weight of the Hebrew 
 talent, the one that appears to be received 
 
 EXODUS... XXV. 
 
 [v. 34—40. 
 
 37 And thou shalt make the seven 
 lamps thereof: and they shall light Be ; 
 the lamps thereof, that they may give ascend. 
 
 light over against (it. “— 
 é 
 38 And the tongs thereof, and the #7" ” 
 
 snuffdishes thereof, shall be of pure 
 gold. | 
 39 Of a talent of pure gold shall 7 Actsz, 
 he make it, with all these vessels. tich. Sam 
 40 And “look that thou make them Heb. 
 
 : é _, which thou 
 after their pattern, ‘which was shewed was¢ 
 
 2 at 
 thee in the mount. cco. 
 
 most generally would make it about 94 lbs. 
 See ON XXXVlil. 27. 
 
 vessels] Rather, utensils [see on xxvii. 
 19]. 
 
 Several writers have treated of the sym- 
 bolism of the lights of the Golden Candlestick 
 with their oil, of its ornamentation with the 
 knobs and flowers, and of its branched form 
 (Bahr, Hengstenberg, Keil,&c.). All these par- 
 ticulars might have been in later times appro- 
 priated by the prophetic inspiration as figures 
 illustrative of spiritual truth. See Zech. iv. 
 1—14; Rev. 1. 12, 13, 20. But in any espe~ 
 cial connection with the place held by the 
 Candlestick in the Sanctuary, as its plan was 
 revealed to Moses, there appears to be only 
 one peculiar point of symbolism on which 
 stress can be laid—the fact that the lamps 
 were seven in number. ‘The general fashion 
 of the Candlestick and its ornaments might 
 have been a matter of taste; light was of 
 necessity required inthe’ Tabernacle, and where- 
 ever light is used in ceremonial observance, it 
 may of course be taken in a general way as a 
 figure of the Light of Truth; but in the 
 Sanctuary of the covenanted people, it must 
 plainly have been understood as expressly sig- 
 nificant that the number of the lamps agreed 
 with the number of the Covenant. The 
 Covenant of Jehovah was essentially a Cove- 
 nant of light. 
 
 40. Seeon wv. 9. 
 
 NOTE on CHAP. XXV. 4. 
 
 ON THE COLOURS OF THE TABERNACLE. 
 Ie 
 
 Our version is most probably right in its 
 rendering of the names of the three colours 
 used in the curtains and vails of the Tabernacle. 
 But the subject is a doubtful one. ‘The names 
 of colours in all languages appear to have been 
 very vaguely used, until the progress of science 
 in connection with the decorative arts has 
 rendered greater precision both possible and 
 
 desirable. Our own word gray, as applied 
 not only to the mixture of black and white 
 
 now so called, but also to the brown dress of j 
 the ‘‘gray friars” and to the cockchafer (the 
 ‘* ray fly” of Milton) ; and the Latin purpureus | 
 as applied to snow, the swan and the foam 
 
 of the sea, to the rose, to a beautiful human ; 
 eye, as well as to the colour now known 
 
 as purple, may be taken as instances. The 
 ipdrioy mopdhupody of John xix. 2 is called 
 xAapvda koxkivyy in Matt. xxvii. 28. Mr, 
 
POs fae nA: 3 
 
 Gladstone’s essay on the use of the names of 
 colours in Homer furnishes other illustrations! 
 That the Hebrew names were used with not 
 more stedfastness is proved by Mr Bevan in 
 Smith’s ‘ Dict. of the Bible’ (Art. ‘ Colours’). 
 The Hebrew names in the text must however 
 have been applied at the time with distinct 
 denotation in reference to the use of the yarn 
 in the embroidery of the curtains. The un- 
 certainty concerns only our discovering what 
 the colours actually were. ‘The earliest equi- 
 valents we have for the Hebrew words are 
 those used by the LXX., which have been 
 adopted by Philo and Josephus, and have been 
 followed by the ancient versions in general. 
 But we are unfortunately far from certain of 
 the purport of the Greek words. 
 
 Il. 
 
 The most important of the three colours 
 mentioned in this place is the one rendered 
 blue. The balance of evidence seems to be 
 in favour of its being a pure sky blue, The 
 Hebrew is #2kéleth (M22H), for which the 
 LXX. have vYaxivOos, and the Vulgate Hya- 
 cinthus. As the name of a flower, the 
 Greek word has been taken for the iris, 
 the gladiolus, the delphinium, or the hya- 
 cinth: as the name of a precious stone, it 
 evidently could not, as some have supposed, 
 belong to the amethyst, since it is mentioned. 
 with the amethyst (duéOvoros) in Rev. xxi. 
 20; it most likely denoted the sapphire?: 
 as the name of a colour, it has been supposed 
 to denote pure blue, purple, violet, black, red 
 or rust colour’. Of the different flowers to 
 which the word has been ascribed, it may be 
 remarked that the greater number aye blue; 
 for example, the common iris, the larkspur, 
 the wild hyacinth, and the starch hyacinth, 
 which is so abundant in the neighbourhood of 
 Athens. The Hebrew word has been very 
 generally taken to denote either blue, or 
 bluish purple, while ‘‘the purple” associated 
 with it has been supposed to have had a 
 stronger red tinge. Philo+, Josephus®, and 
 Saadia, with most of the Fathers and the 
 rabbinists, appear to have understood it as 
 the colour of the sky. Philo, who took it to 
 symbolize the air, in the expression which he 
 applies to the air (pvcex yap peAas), has been 
 reasonably supposed to allude to the dark full 
 
 1 “Essays on Homer,’ Vol. II. p. 457. 
 - 2 Professor Maskelyne considers that the hya- 
 cinth of Pliny (‘H. N.’ xxxvit. 40) and other 
 classical writers was what we call the sapphire, 
 while the stone called sapphire by the ancients 
 was lapis lazuli. ‘Edinb. Rev.’ No. 253. See 
 note on Ex. xxviii. 18. 
 
 3 See Liddell and Scott’s ‘ Lex.’ 
 
 Sav toy Mos, I11.:6. 
 ee wAnt. Jil. 7. § 7. 
 XXV. 5. 
 
 See also note on Ex. 
 
 od 
 
 tinge which distinguishes the skies of southern 
 latitudes §, 
 
 That the Egyptians in early times used 
 indigo as a blue dye is certain’, and it is by 
 no means improbable that the Israelites did 
 the same, If, as Wilkinson and others® sup- 
 pose, the blue border of the Israelites’ gar- 
 ments was adopted from an Egyptian custom, 
 the facts that the Egyptian borders were 
 certainly dyed with indigo, and that the 
 Hebrew and Greek words expressing the 
 colour of the Israelites’ borders (Num. xv. 
 38) are ¢ékeleth and dvaxwbos, favour the 
 notion that these words express the colour 
 obtained from indigo. But the etymology of 
 the Hebrew term is supposed rather to in- 
 dicate that the colour was procured, like the 
 Tyrian purple, from a shell-fish. It is con- 
 ceived that while a species of Murex pro- 
 duced the purple, a Buccinum produced the 
 blue®. Both colours were obtained by the 
 Tyrians from ‘‘the Isles of Elishah,” that is, 
 the Isles of the A’gean Sea, where it seems 
 most probable that each must have been ob- 
 tained from the sea’, The art of preparing 
 the dye from the fish is now lost, and this, 
 of course, increases the uncertainty of the 
 question at issue. 
 
 It is however likely that técleth was the 
 name of the well-known colour obtained 
 from more than one kind of dye. The 
 inquiry regarding the colour itself has peculiar 
 interest from its having been the predominating 
 colour in the decoration of the Sanctuary. 
 Besides taking its place with the other two 
 colours in the curtains and vails of the Taber- 
 nacle, it is found by itself in the loops of the 
 curtains (Ex, xxvi. 4), in the lace of the 
 breastplate of the High Priest (xxviii. 28), in 
 the robe of the ephod (xxviii. 31), and the 
 lace of the mitre (xxviii. 37). In wrapping 
 up the sacred utensils when the host was on 
 the march, blue cloths, purple cloths, and 
 scarlet cloths were used for the various 
 articles according to specific directions (Num. 
 iv.). ‘Fhe national significance of blue ap- 
 pears to be shewn in the blue fringes that 
 have been mentioned (Num. xv. 38; cf. Matt. 
 RX y 
 
 Several Jewish commentators, followed by 
 Luther and Cranmer, have taken the word 
 tékeleth to denote yellow silk. It is hardly 
 
 6 Other grounds for rendering the Hebrew 
 word sky dlue, rather than violet or bluish purple, 
 as Gesenius and others have preferred, may be 
 found in Bochart, ‘Op.’ Vol. 11. p. 728, and 
 Bahr, ‘Symbolik,’ Vol. I. p. 303. 
 
 7 Wilkinson, * Pop. Acc.’ Vol. 1. p. 78. 
 
 8 Henstenberg, ‘Egypt and the Books of 
 Moses,’ Smith, ‘The Pentateuch,’ p. 302. 
 
 9 Bochart, ‘Op.’ p. 111. 727. Gesenius, s. v, 
 Fiirst, s.v. Wilkinson, Note on Herodot. II. 
 20. Tristram, ‘Nat. Hist. of the Bible,’ p. 297. 
 
 10 Ezek, xxvii. 7; Jer. x. 9. _ Cf. Plin. ‘H.N.’ 
 IX. 60, sg. 
 
 67 
 
368 
 
 necessary to state that the material could not 
 have been silk [see note on Ex, xxv. 4]. ‘The 
 notion that the colour was yellow seems to 
 stand upon a mere hollow conjecture sug- 
 gested by the natural colour of silk. 
 
 III. 
 
 Purple is in Heb. argaman (}!2378), in the 
 UXX: Top gtipa- The derivation of the He- 
 brew word is doubtful, but all authorities 
 seem to be in favour of its signifying the 
 purple obtained from more than one species 
 of shell-fish in the Mediterranean, which be- 
 came commonly known as the Tyrian purple 
 (Ezek. xxvii, 7, 16). The colour seems to 
 have had a strong red tinge, and to have 
 approached what we call crimson, ‘The fish 
 that produced it has been supposed to be a 
 muscle, but it is hardly to be doubted that it 
 was in fact a Murex, two species of which 
 (M. brandaris and M. trunculus) might have 
 furnished it (Tristram). Hence the dye was 
 called murex by the Latin writers. ‘The colour 
 is mentioned in connection with the Sanctuary 
 only in combination with blue and scarlet in 
 the curtains and vails and in some of the 
 cloths for wrapping (Num, iv. 13). The 
 estimation in which the dye was held may be 
 inferred from Judg, vili. 26; Esth, i, 6; Prov, 
 XXX, 22, 
 
 IV. 
 
 Scarlet is in Hebrew tola’ath shani (nyin 
 12), in LXX. kéxkwos Surdods, and in 
 Vulg. ‘‘coccus bistinctus!.” But the literal 
 translation of the two Hebrew words is 
 scarlet worm, while in Lev, xiv. 4, 6, 49,51, 52, 
 the words are transposed (nym 11%), So as 
 to signify worm scarlet. ‘The word shani, 
 by itself, denotes scarlet in Gen. xxxviii. 28, 
 30; Josh, ii. 18; Prov. xxxi, 21, &c. Ancient 
 and modern authorities agree as to the colour, 
 
 EXOD OSTEO VS 
 
 which is uniformly called scarlet in our ver- 
 sion except in Jer. iv. 30, where it is rendered 
 crimson, ‘The dye used to produce the colour 
 " the vail of the Temple is called karmil 
 ( 122), a Chron. ii. 7, 14, lil, 14, Where 
 it is rendered crimson, though there is no 
 reason to doubt that the colour was the same 
 as the scarlet of the Tabernacle. It appears 
 to have been obtained from the coccus 
 ilicis, the cochineal insect of the holm oak, 
 which was used in the East before the coccus 
 cacti, the well-known cochineal of the prickly 
 pear, was introduced from Mexico, ‘The 
 Arabic name for it is kermez, which is evi- 
 dently related to the Hebrew word karmil, 
 The root karm exists in our crimson and 
 carmine. In the use of the Sanctuary, it is 
 found only in the figured curtains and em- 
 broidery associated with blue and purple, and 
 in the wrapping cloths (Num, iv. 8). It 
 appears to have had a special connection with 
 the rites of purification in association with 
 hyssop and cedar (Lev. xiv. 4, 6, 49, 51, 523 
 Num. xix. 6; Heb, ix. 19). 
 
 V4 
 
 On the whole, thefe does not seem to be 
 much ground to doubt that our version, in 
 rendering the names of the colours of the 
 woven and embroidered work of the Sanctuary, 
 expresses the most probable conclusions, 
 
 The three colours, blue, scarlet and purple, 
 have been recognized all but universally as 
 royal colours, such as were best suited for the 
 decoration of a palace*. ‘This fact appears to 
 furnish sufficient ground for their having been 
 appointed as the colours for the embroidery 
 which was to adorn the dwelling-place of 
 Jehovah, Many have, however, imagined 
 that there was some other symbolical signifi- 
 cance in them. See Bahr, ‘Symbolik,’ Vol. 1. 
 p. 3243. Dr W. L. Alexanders se 
 ‘Cyclo.’ Vol. 1.:p.-54i, cue, 
 
 NOTEAONSGUAP ox Vota: 
 
 On THE MERCY SEAT. 
 
 The word kapporeth (N53) is never applied 
 to anything except the golden cover of the 
 Ark. ‘The root from which it comes, aphar 
 (153), without doubt signifies to cover, and 
 bears an obvious resemblance to our word 
 cover. In one passage of the Old ‘Testament, 
 but in one only, the Hebrew word, in its Ka/ 
 or primitive form, is used in this sense in 
 reference to covering the Ark of Noah with 
 pitch (Gen. vi. 14). In the Piel form (Kipper, 
 5D) the root is used nearly seventy times, 
 
 and always in the sense of forgiving or recon 
 
 1 The Greek and Latin renderings appear to 
 be .based on a mistake in regard to the word 
 ‘3W~, which, with other vowel points, would 
 mean ¢wice. 
 
 ciling, that is of covering up offences. Now 
 a large number of recent authorities, Jewish 
 and others, have preferred to take kapporeth 
 in the simple sense of a cover. Josephus and 
 Saadia give countenance to this rendering. 
 ‘The question thus brought before us is, was 
 the kapporeth originally regarded as a mere 
 part of the Ark, or as something having a 
 distinct significance, and a recognized desig- 
 nation, of its own? ‘The inquiry is of great 
 importance, from its bearing on the character 
 
 # See Esth. i, 6, viii. 153 2°S. i gape 
 ili, 103 Jer. x..9; Ezek, xxiii) Gees 
 Luke xvi. 19; Rev. xviii. 12, &c. 
 
 3 Kimchi, Mendelsohn, de Wette, Gesenius, 
 Schott, Fiirst, Zunz, Knobel, Herxheimer, 
 Leeser, Benisch, Sharpe, &c. But amongst the 
 Jewish commentators, Wogue.and Kalisch are 
 exceptions. 
 
ort. | 
 
 of the Mosaic ritual. The latter view appears 
 to deserve the preference on these grounds;— 
 
 1. In the order of the sacred text, the 
 Mercy seat- is described by itself, and is di- 
 rected to be placed ‘‘above upon the Ark” 
 (Ex. xxv. 17—22, xxvi. 34): it is never 
 called the cover (or kapporeth) of the Ark, 
 but is always mentioned as a distinct thing 
 (Ex. xxx. 6, XXxi. 7, XXXV. I2, XXXVil. 6-—— 
 9, Xxxix. 35; Lev. xvi. 13; Num. vil. 89, 
 &c.). 
 2. ‘The Holy of Holies is called in the 
 first Book of Chronicles (xxviil. 11) the house 
 of the kapporeth (7%9371 0°32); and in Levi- 
 ticus (xvi. 2) it is calied the place within the 
 vail before the kapporeth, which is upon the 
 Ark, Such expressions as these seem clearly 
 to indicate that the kapporeth could not have 
 been regarded as a mere subordinate part of 
 the Ark. 
 
 3. An argument scarcely less strong may 
 be drawn from the relationship of the word 
 kapporeth to kippurim (D"\B3)=atonements, 
 in connection with the rites of the Day of 
 Atonement, or (as it is literally) the Day of 
 Atonements. No part of the Sanctuary is so 
 intimately connected with the £ippurim made 
 on that day by the High Priest as the sap- 
 poreth (Lev. xvi. 2, 13, 14, 15). The phrase- 
 ology of these passages is certainly not such 
 as could be well accounted for by the mere 
 position of the kapporeth as the cover of the 
 Ark, 
 
 4. The general current of the most ancient 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 1 The ten curtains of the tabernacle. 7 The 
 
 PG U.S OVE 
 
 Jewish tradition evidently favours the deriva- 
 tion of kapporeth from kipper (183), the Piel 
 form of the verb, which, as it has been already 
 observed, nowhere bears any other meaning 
 than to atone, or to shew mercy. ‘The oldest 
 authority is the Septuagint, in which the word 
 is rendered iiaarnptov éridnual. Philo speaks 
 of the cover of the Ark being called in the 
 Scripture iiacrnpiov, asa Symbol ris iNew Tod 
 Gcov Suvayews?. Rabbinical tradition fur- 
 nishes evidence to the same effect. The 
 vowel points in the word kapporeth (N12) 
 are such as to connect it with the Pie/ form 
 kipper, rather than with the Ka/ form kaphar. 
 Another argument may be added from the 
 use in the Targums of the same expression as 
 is found 1 Chron, xxviii. 11, the house of the 
 kapporeth [see § 2], to answer to ‘‘the oracle” 
 (133) in t K. vi. 5. 
 
 5. We might at once settle the question 
 as to the Mercy seat having a meaning of its 
 own by referring to the passages in the New 
 Testament in which the word jdagrnptoy 
 occurs (Heb. ix. 5; Rom. iii. 25). But it 
 is satisfactory to have such clear evidence as 
 exists that the New Testament use of the 
 word is not a late or artificial adaptation of 
 it, but a clear and simple application of its 
 original meaning, 
 
 1 Fiirst, following certain Jewish authorities, 
 conceives that itaoryptov is a gloss of later date. 
 But this is evidently a mere conjecture of pre- 
 judice. 
 
 2 “Vit. Mos.’ 111. 8. 
 
 OREOVER thou shalt make 
 
 the tabernacle with ten cur- 
 
 369 
 
 tains of fine twined linen, and blue, ; y24, 
 and purple, and scarlet: with cheru- “2 workof 
 
 a@ cunning 
 
 bims of ‘cunning work shalt thou make workman, 
 them. or, e72- 
 
 broiderer. 
 
 eleven curtains of goats hair. 14 The co- 
 vering of rams skins. 15 The boards of the 
 tabernacle, with their sockets and bars. 3% 
 The vail for the ark. 36 The hanging for 
 the door. 
 
 THE TABERNACLE. 
 XXVi. I—37. (XxXvi. 8—38.) 
 
 Cuap. XXVI, The Tabernacle was to 
 comprise three main parts, the TABERNACLE, 
 more strictly so-called, its TENT, and its 
 COVERING (Ex, xxxv. II, XXXiX. 33, 34, 
 xl. 19, 34; Num. iii. 25, &c.). These parts 
 are very clearly distinguished in the Hebrew, 
 but they are confounded in many places of 
 the English Version [see on vv. 7, 9, &c.], 
 and in still more places of the LX X., the Vul- 
 gate, and other versions, ancient and modern. 
 The TABERNACLE itself was to consist of cur- 
 tains of fine linen woven with coloured figures 
 of Cherubim, and a structure of boards which 
 was to contain the Holy Place and the Most 
 
 wort 1, 
 
 Holy Place; the TENT was to be a true tent 
 of goats’ hair cloth to contain and shelter the 
 Tabernacle: the COVERING was to be of red 
 rams’ skins and tachash skins [see on xxv. 5 ], 
 and was spread over the goats’ hair tent as an 
 additional protection against the weather. 
 On the external form of the Tabernacle and 
 the arrangement of its parts, see Note at the 
 end of the chap. ‘The account of its comple- 
 tion is given ch, xxxvi, 8—38. 
 
 THE TABERNACLE. 
 XXVi. I—6. (Cf. xxxvi. 8—13.) 
 
 1. tabernacle] The Hebrew is mishkan, i.e. 
 dwelling-place (Job xviii. 21, xxi. 283 Ps. 
 xlix. 11; Is. xxii. 16, &c. &c.). When it de- 
 notes the Dwelling-place of Jehovah, it is 
 
 AA 
 
Crd 
 
 2 The length of one curtain shall 
 be eight and twenty cubits, and the 
 breadth of one curtain four cubits: and 
 every one of the curtains shall have one 
 measure. 
 
 3 The five curtains shall be coupled 
 together one to another; and other 
 five curtains shall be coupled one to 
 another. 
 
 4 And thou shalt make loops of blue 
 upon the edge of the one curtain from 
 
 ENODU Sarey Tt 
 
 [v. 2—6, 
 
 the selvedge in the coupling; and like- 
 wise shalt thou make in the uttermost | 
 edge of another curtain, in the coupling 
 of the second. 
 5 Fifty loops shalt thou make in 
 the one curtain, and fifty loops shalt 
 thou make in the edge of the curtain 
 that zs in the coupling of the second; 
 that the loops may take hold one of | 
 another. ; 
 
 6 And thou shalt make fifty taches 
 
 regularly accompanied by the definite article 
 (hammishkan). ‘The word tabernacle (which 
 our translators took from the Vulgate) might 
 fitly designate the structure of boards which 
 formed the walls of the Holy Places, but its 
 meaning does not etymologically answer to 
 mishkan. ‘The Hebrew word is however 
 uniformly rendered tabernacle in our Bible: 
 the confusion to which reference has been 
 made in the preceding note oceurs in render- 
 ing the names of the Tent and the Covering. 
 
 It should be noticed that in this place ham- 
 mishkan is not used in its full sense as denot- 
 ing the dwelling-place of Jehovah: it denotes 
 only the tabernacle cloth. It was the textile 
 work which was regarded as the essential part 
 of the Tabernacle, and this. is apparent in 
 our version of v. 6. ‘The tent-cloth in like 
 manner and for the like reason is. called 
 simply the Tent (vw. 11). ‘The wooden parts 
 of both the Tabernacle and the Tent are evi- 
 dently mentioned as if they were subordinate 
 to the textile parts—The word mishkan is 
 employed with three distinct ranges of mean- 
 ing, (1) in its strict sense, comprising the 
 cloth of the Tabernacle with its woodwork 
 (Exod exxv.)9;? XXV1.36,7 xxxvi./13) x1. 78, 
 &c.); (2) in a narrower sense, for the taber- 
 nacle-cloth only (Exod. xxvi. 1, 6, Xxxv. II, 
 XXXIX. 33, 34, &c.); (3) in a wider sense, 
 for the Mishkan with its Tent and Covering 
 (Exod. xxvii. 19, xxxv. 18, &c.). 
 
 with ten curtains| Rather, of ten 
 breadths. ‘The Hebrew word (yér?ab) is 
 everywhere in our version rendered a curtain. 
 Some corresponding word is used in the An- 
 cient Versions (LXX. avAaia, Vulg. cortina) 
 and in some modern ones. In such places as 
 Ps. civ. 2, Is. liv. 2, Jer. iv. 20, the Hebrew 
 word is evidently applied to an entire tent- 
 curtain. But in connection with the Sanctu- 
 ary it always denotes what in English would 
 more strictly be called a breadth. Five of 
 these breadths were united so as to form 
 what, in common usage, we should call a large 
 curtain. (See on v. 3.) ‘The word curtain 
 will be used in this, its ordinary sense, in 
 these notes, ‘The two curtains thus formed 
 were coupled together by the loops and taches 
 
 to make the entire tabernacle-cloth, which is 
 what is here called ‘‘the tabernacle.” See 
 preceding note. 
 
 fine twined linen] i.e. the most carefully 
 spun thread of flax, each thread consisting of 
 two or more smaller threads twined together 
 (see Wilkinson, ‘ Pop. Account,’ 11. 76). On 
 the original word for /inen, see on xxv. 4. ; 
 
 blue, and purple, and scarlet] See on xxv. 4. 
 
 cherubims| See on xxv. 18. 
 
 of cunning work] More properly, of the 
 work of the skilled weaver. ‘The 
 coloured figures of Cherubim were to be 
 worked in the loom, as in the manufacture of 
 tapestry and carpets: in the hangings for the 
 ‘Tent they were to be embroidered with the 
 needle [see on v, 36]. On the different kinds 
 of workmen employed on the textile fabrics, 
 see ON XXXV. 35. 
 
 3. Each curtain formed of five breadths 
 (see on v. 1), was 42 feet in length and 30 
 feet in breadth, taking the cubit at 18 inches. 
 
 4. This verse is obscure as it stands in 
 our version, nor is it easy to render the 
 original word for word so as to make the 
 sense clear, But the meaning appears to be, 
 And thou shalt make loops of blue on the sel- 
 vedge of the one breadth (which is) on the side 
 (of the one curtain) at the coupling; and the 
 same shalt thou do in the selvedge of the outside 
 breadth of the other (curtain) at the coupling. 
 The ‘‘coupling” is the uniting together of 
 the two curtains. This explanation substanti- 
 ally agrees with the Ancient Versions and 
 most of the modern ones. 
 
 5. ‘The words ‘in the edge of the curtain 
 that is in the coupling of the second,” mean, 
 on the edge of the breadth that is at the coup- 
 ling in the second (curtain).—The word ren- 
 dered ‘‘loops” (/ulaoth) only occurs here and 
 in xxxvi. 11. It is doubtful whether it has 
 connection with any Semitic root; it is pro- 
 bably of Egyptian origin, Conjectures on the 
 other side may be seen in Gesenius’ ‘ Hand- 
 worterbuch,’ and Fiirst’s ‘ Lex.’ 
 
 6. aches of gold] Each clasp, or tache, 
 was to unite two opposite loops. On the 
 Heb. word for tache, see p. 375, note 7. 
 
Vv, 7—15.| 
 
 of gold, and couple the curtains to- 
 gether with the taches: and it shall 
 be one tabernacle. 
 
 7 4 And thou shalt make curtains 
 of goats’ hair to be a covering upon 
 the tabernacle: eleven curtains shalt 
 thou make. 
 
 8 The length of one curtain shall be 
 thirty cubits, and the breadth of one 
 curtain four cubits: and the eleven 
 curtains shall be all of one measure. 
 
 g And thou shalt couple five cur- 
 tains by themselves, and six curtains 
 by themselves, and shalt double the 
 sixth curtain in the forefront of the 
 tabernacle. 
 
 10 And thou shalt make fifty loops 
 on the edge of the one curtain that is 
 outmost in the coupling, and fifty loops 
 in the edge of the curtain which 
 coupleth the second. 
 
 couple the curtains| i.e. couple the two 
 outside breadths mentioned in v. 4. 
 
 it shall be one tabernacle] ‘The tabernacle- 
 cloth alone is here meant. See onv.1. For 
 the mode in which the tabernacle-cloth was 
 disposed, see Note at the end of the chap., 
 § IV, 
 
 The Tent=cloth. 
 97—13 (XXXvi. 14—18). 
 
 7. curtains| See on wv. I. 
 
 of goats’ hair] See on Xxv. 4. . 
 
 a covering upon the tabernacle] a tent 
 overthe Tabernacle, The same Hebrew 
 words are rightly translated xxxvi. 14. The 
 name ohe/, which is here used, is the regular 
 one for a tent of skins or cloth of any sort. 
 See introd. note to ch. xxv., and Note at the 
 end of this chap. § II. 
 
 9. The width of each breadth of the tent- 
 cloth was to be four cubits, the same as that 
 of the breadths of the figured cloth of the 
 Tabernacle (v. 2). But the length was to be 
 two cubits more, and there was to bean addi- 
 tional breadth (v. 13). One of the curtains 
 (see on v, 1) was to comprise five breadths 
 and the other six. 
 
 shalt double the sixth curtain in the fore- 
 front of the tabernacle} ‘The last word 
 should be Tent, not tabernacle. The passage 
 might be rendered, thou shalt equally divide 
 the sixth breadth at the front of the Tent. In 
 this way, half a breadth would overhang at 
 the front and half at the back. See v. 12, and 
 Note at the end of the chapter. 
 
 10. The meaning may be thus given :— 
 And thou shalt make fifty loops on the selvedge 
 
 EXODUS. XXVI. 371 
 
 rr And thou shalt make fifty taches 
 of brass, and put the taches into the 
 loops, and couple the 'tent together, 
 that it may be one. 
 
 12 And the remnant that remaineth 
 of the curtains of the tent, the half 
 curtain that remaineth, shall hang over 
 the backside of the tabernacle. 
 
 13 And a cubit on the one side, 
 and a cubit on the other side ‘of that t Heb. 
 which remaineth in the length of the *aindér, 
 curtains of the tent, it shall hang over 9) %"" 
 the sides of the tabernacle on this side 
 and on that side, to cover it. 
 
 14, And thou shalt make a cover- 
 ing for the tent of rams’ skins dyed 
 red, and a covering above of badgers’ 
 skins. 
 
 15 4 And thou shalt make boards 
 for the tabernacle of shittim wood 
 standing up. 
 
 1 Or, 
 
 covering. 
 
 of the outside breadth of the one (curtain) at 
 the coupling, and fifty loops on the selvedge of 
 the outside breadth of the other (curtain) at the 
 coupling. Cf. note v. 4. 
 
 11. In the Tent, clasps of bronze were 
 used to unite the loops of the two curtains; 
 in the Tabernacle, clasps of gold, cf. v, 6 and 
 on v. 37. 
 
 couple the tent together| ‘This is the right 
 translation. ‘The ‘‘ covering,” as the alter- 
 native for fent given in the margin, is wrong. 
 See introd. note to this chap. By ‘‘the tent” is 
 here meant the tent-cloth alone. See on wv. 1. 
 
 12. the half curtain] See on wv. 9, and 
 Note at the end of the chapter, § IV. 
 
 13. The measure of the entire tabernacle- 
 cloth was 40 cubits by 28; that of the tent- 
 cloth was 44 cubits by 30. When the latter 
 was placed over the former, it spread beyond 
 it at the back and front two cubits (the 
 ‘‘half-curtain” wv. 9, 12) and at the sides one 
 cubit, See Note at the end of the chapter. 
 
 The Covering for the Tent. 
 v. 14. (Cf. xxxvi. 19.) 
 14. rams skins dyed red] See on Xxv. 5. 
 badgers’ skins} The skin, not of the 
 badger, but of a marine animal called tachash, 
 perhaps the dugong or the seal. See on 
 SxS 
 
 The Boards and Bars of the Tabernacle. 
 I5—30 (XXxXVi. 20—34). 
 15. boards] There is no reason to doubt 
 that these were simple boards or planks (Vulg. 
 AA2 
 
t Heb. 
 hands. 
 
 16 Ten cubits shall be the length 
 of a board, and a cubit and a half shall 
 be the breadth of one board. 
 
 17 ‘Iwo ‘tenons shall there be in 
 one board, set in order one against 
 another: thus shalt thou make for all 
 the boards of the tabernacle. 
 
 18 And thou shalt make the boards 
 for the tabernacle, twenty boards on 
 the south side southward. 
 
 1g And thou shalt make forty 
 sockets of silver under the twenty 
 boards; two sockets under one board 
 
 for his two tenons, and two sockets: 
 
 under another board for his two tenons. 
 
 tabule), of sufficient thickness for the stability 
 of the structure. They are called pillars in 
 Greek (LXX. orvAo, Philo and Josephus, 
 xioves). Bahr adopts the rabbinical notion 
 that they were a cubit in thickness ; Josephus, 
 with greater probability, says that they were 
 four fingers. 
 
 of shittim wood| ‘The shittah tree (Acacia 
 Seyal, see on xxv. 5) has been said to be too 
 small to produce boards of the size here 
 described. It has been conjectured that each 
 board was jointed up of several pieces. But 
 Mr ‘Tristram regards this conjecture as need- 
 less, and states that there are acacia-trees near 
 Engedi which would produce boards four 
 feet in width (‘ Nat. Hist. of the Bible,’ p. 392). 
 If there are no trees so large in the Peninsula 
 of Sinai at this time, liberal allowance may be 
 made for the diminished capabilities of the 
 region for the production of timber. 
 
 17. tenons] See Note at the end of the 
 chapter. 
 
 18. The dimensions of the wooden part 
 of the Tabernacle are not directly stated; but 
 they are easily made out from the measure- 
 ment, number and arrangement of the boards, 
 if we estimate each of the corner boards (wv. 
 23) as adding half a cubit to the width. The 
 entire length of the structure was thirty 
 cubits in the clear, and its width ten cubits. 
 With this agree Philo (‘ Vit. Mos.’ 111. 7), Jo- 
 sephus (‘ Ant.’ 111. 6. § 3), and all tradition. 
 
 the south side southward| The Hebrew 
 phrase, which also occurs xxvii. 9, Xxxvi. 23, 
 XXXViil. 9, is relieved from pleonasm if it is 
 rendered, the south side on the right. 
 (Geneva Fr., Zunz, Leeser; cf. Gesen. p. 600.) 
 As the entrance of the ‘Tabernacle was at its 
 east end, the south side, to a person entering 
 it, would be on the /eft hand: but we learn 
 from Josephus (‘ Ant.’ vu. 3. § 6) that it was 
 usual in speaking of the Temple: to identify 
 
 EXODUS, XX Vi, 
 
 [v. 16—24. 
 
 20 And for the second side of the 
 tabernacle on the north side there shall 
 be twenty boards: 
 
 21 And their forty sockets-of silver ; 
 two sockets under one board, and two 
 sockets under another board. 
 
 22 And for the sides of the taber- 
 nacle westward thou shalt make six 
 boards. 
 
 23 And two boards shalt thou make 
 for the corners of the tabernacle in the 
 two sides. 
 
 24 And they shall be ‘coupled to-1Heb. 
 
 twinned. 
 
 gether beneath, and they shall be 
 coupled together above the head of it 
 
 the south with the right hand and the north 
 with the left hand, the entrance being re- 
 garded as the face of the structure and the 
 west end as its back. 
 
 19. sockets] More literally, bases. The 
 same word is rightly rendered ‘‘ foundations” 
 in Job xxxvill. 6: most versions in this place 
 translate it by some word equivalent to bases. 
 Each base weighed a talent, that is, about 
 94 lbs. (see xxxvili. 27), and must have been a 
 massive block. Nothing is said of the form, 
 but as the tenons of the boards were ‘set in 
 order one against another” (v. 17), the bases 
 may have fitted together so as to make 
 a continuous foundation for the walls of 
 boards, presenting a succession of sockets, or 
 mortices (each base having a single socket), 
 into which the tenons were to fit. ‘This seems 
 to have been the notion of Philo and Josephus 
 [see Note at the end of chapter, § I.]. The 
 bases served not only for ornament but 
 also for a protection of the lower ends of 
 the boards from the decay which would 
 have resulted from contact with the ground. 
 The word socket seems to have been adopted 
 from Josephus. The word he uses is. orpo- 
 guyé, which does not answer to the Hebrew 
 etymologically, as the Baots of the LX X. and 
 Philo does; but there is an obvious resem- 
 blance which seems to have struck him be- 
 tween what is here spoken of and the socket 
 (orpodryé) in which the tenon of a door turns 
 to serve as a hinge, according to common 
 Eastern custom. 
 
 22. the sides of the tabernacle westward | 
 Rather, the back of the Tabernacle 
 towards the west. Seeonvw. 18. 
 
 23. in the two sides| Rather, at the 
 back. So LXX., Vulg., Luther, de Wette, 
 Zunz, Herxh., &c, 
 
 24. The corner boards appear to have 
 been of such width, and so placed, as to add 
 
1) U5. CA 
 
 ~ 29 And thou shalt overlay the boards 
 with gold, and make their rings of gold 
 for places for the bars: and thou shalt 
 overlay the bars with gold. 
 30 And thou shalt rear up the ta- 
 bernacle “according to the fashion ¢ chap. 2s. 
 thereof which was shewed thee in the Acts 7 40 
 
 V. 25—33-] 373 
 unto one ring: thus shall it be for 
 them both; they shall be for the two 
 corners, ‘ 
 
 _25 And they shall be eight boards, 
 and their sockets of silver, sixteen 
 sockets; two sockets under one board, 
 
 and two sockets under another board. 
 epacnss 
 
 26 { And thou shalt make bars of 
 
 shittim wood; five for the boards of 
 the one side of the tabernacle, 
 
 27 And five bars for the boards of 
 the other side of the tabernacle, and 
 five bars for the boards of the side of 
 the tabernacle, for the two sides west- 
 ward. 
 
 28 And the middle bar in the midst 
 of the boards shall reach from end to 
 end. 
 
 a cubit to the width of the structure, making 
 up with the six boards of full width (wv. 22) 
 ten cubits in the clear (see on v. 18). There 
 is nO Occasion to imagine, as some have done, 
 that each of them consisted of two strips 
 mitered together longitudinally so as to form 
 a corner by itself. They may have been 
 simple boards with the width of half a cubit 
 added to the thickness of the boards of the 
 sides. ‘The boards at the corners were to be 
 - coupled together at the top ‘‘unto one ring,” 
 and at the bottom ‘unto one ring,” and each 
 ring was to be so formed as to receive two 
 bars meeting at a right angle. 
 
 26, 27. See on wv. 28, and Note at the 
 end of the chapter, § I. 
 
 27. for the two sides westward| for the 
 back towards the west. Cf. v. 22. 
 
 28. in the midst of the boards] ‘The middle 
 bar was distinguished from the other bars by 
 its reaching from end to end. ‘The Hebrew 
 might mean either that the midst throughout 
 which it ran was the middle between the top 
 and the bottom of the boards, or that it was 
 a passage for it bored through the substance 
 of the wood out of sight. ‘The latter would 
 seem to have been the notion of our trans- 
 lators, See xxxvi. 33. But if we suppose the 
 boards to have been of ordinary thickness 
 [see on v. 16], by far the more likely sup- 
 position is that the bar was visible and passed 
 through an entire row of rings. In either 
 case, it served to hold the whole wall to- 
 gether. On the probable relation of this 
 middle bar to the others, see Note and wood- 
 cut, p. 377- 
 
 29. overlay... with gold] See on xxv. 11. 
 
 their rings| See on v. 28. 
 
 30. Cf. xxv. 9, 40. 
 
 mount. 
 
 31 4 And thou shalt make a vail of 
 blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine 
 twined linen of cunning work: with 
 cherubims shall it be made: 
 
 32 And thou shalt hang it upon 
 four pillars of shittim woed overlaid 
 with gold: their hooks shall be of gold, 
 upon the four sockets of silver, 
 
 33 § And thou shalt hang up the 
 vail under the taches, that thou mayest 
 
 The Vail and the Holy Places. 
 31—35. (Cf. xxxvi. 35, 36.) 
 
 31. wail] The Hebrew word literally 
 means separation [see ON Xxxv. 12]. 
 
 blue, and purple, and scarlet] See on xxv. 4, 
 
 tained linen| See on v. I. 
 
 of cunning work, &c.] of work of the 
 skilled weaver [see on v. 1, and on 
 Xxxv. 35] shall it be made, with 
 Cherubim, 
 
 cherubims| ‘The vail of the first Temple 
 was in like manner adorned with Cherubim 
 (2 Chron. iii. 14). It is remarkable that Jo- 
 sephus describes the vail of the Tabernacle as 
 woven with flowers and all sorts of orna- 
 mental forms, except the figures of living crea- 
 tures (‘Ant.’ 11. 6. §4). He himself calls the 
 Cherubim /iving creatures (‘ Ant.’ Il. 6. § 5), 
 and he must have known that Ezekiel does so 
 (x. 20). He is thus plainly at variance with 
 the statement in Exodus. But can it be that 
 he describes the vail according to the one 
 which existed in the Temple in his time? If 
 so, we obtain a striking instance of the 
 operation of the superstition with which the 
 Jews in later times, including Josephus him- 
 self, interpreted the second commandment 
 (see ‘ Ant.’ vill. 7. § 5, and note on Ex. xx. 
 4). It may suggest a thought, if we may 
 conceive that the vail of the Temple which 
 was rent at the Crucifixion had been deprived 
 of its characteristic symbol by the dark pre- 
 judices of the chosen people. 
 
 32. pillars of shittim wood, &c.] Rather, 
 pillars of shittim wood overlaid with gold, 
 their hooks also of gold, upon four 
 bases of silver, Cf. xxxvi. 36. 
 
 33. under the taches| ‘These taches are 
 not, as some suppose, the same as the hooks 
 of the preceding verse. The Hebrew words 
 
74 
 
 bring in thither within the vail the ark 
 of the testimony: and the vail shall 
 divide unto you between the holy place 
 and the most holy. 
 
 34. And thou shalt put the mercy 
 seat upon the ark of the testimony in 
 the most holy place. 
 
 35 And thou shalt set the table 
 without the vail, and the candlestick 
 over against the table on the side of 
 the tabernacle toward the south: and 
 
 are quite different. ‘These are the taches of 
 the tabernacle-cloth (see v. 6). On the diffi- 
 culty of the statement, see Note at the end of 
 the chapter, § I. 
 
 34. mercy seat upon the ark of the testi- 
 mony| See on xxv. 1o—16. ‘The Samaritan 
 text here inserts the passage regarding the 
 Altar of Incense from ch. xxx. 1—10. The 
 omission of all mention of this altar in this 
 place is strange, but the reading of the Sama- 
 ritan bears marks of an intended emendation, 
 and cannot represent the original text. 
 
 35. candlestick| See on xxv. 31. 
 table| See on xxv. 23. 
 
 The Front of the Tent. 
 © 36, 37. ~ (Cf. xxxvi. 37, 38.) 
 
 36. hanging] Rather, curtain [see on 
 XXVIl. 16]. 
 
 the door of the tent| the entrance to 
 ‘the Tent. The word is pethach, that is the 
 opening which it is the office of the door 
 ‘(deleth), or as in this place, of the curtain 
 (masak), to close. The distinction between 
 
 EXODUS. XXVI. 
 
 [v. 34—37 
 
 thou shalt put the table on the north 
 side. 
 
 36 And thou shalt make an hang- 
 ing for the door of the tent, of blue, 
 and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined 
 linen, wrought with needlework. 
 
 7 And thou shalt make for the 
 hanging five pillars of shittim wood, and 
 overlay them with gold, and their hooks 
 shall be of gold: and thou shalt cast 
 five sockets of brass for them. 
 
 door and entrance is generally overlooked in 
 our version. See on Lev. viii. 3. 
 
 wrought with needlework| the work of 
 the embroiderer. The breadths of the 
 cloth and the vail of the Tabernacle were to 
 be of the work of the skilled weaver; 
 the entrance curtain of the Tent and that of 
 the Court (xxvii. 16) were to be of the same 
 materials, but embroidered with the needle, 
 not wrought in figures in the loom. [See on 
 v. I, and on xxxv. 35. | 
 
 387, hanging] curtain asin wv. 36. 
 
 jive pillars| ‘These, it should be ob- 
 served, belonged to the entrance of the Tent, 
 not, in their architectural relation, to the 
 entrance of the Tabernacle [see Note, § III.]. 
 
 overlay them with gold| See on xxv, II. 
 
 their hooks] See on v. 33. ‘These pillars 
 had chapiters (capitals), and fillets (connect~ 
 ing rods, see on xxvii. 10), overlaid with 
 gold (xxxvi. 38). Their bases (see on v. 19) 
 were of bronze (like the taches of the tent- 
 cloth), not of silver, to mark the inferiority 
 of the Tent to the ‘Tabernacle. 
 
 NOTE on CuHap, Xxvi. 1—37. 
 
 ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 
 ‘TABERNACLE. 
 
 I. Zhe Mishkan, its Tent and its Covering. 
 Il. Common view of the arrangement of 
 the parts, Il. Mr Fergusson’s theory. 
 IV. Zhe place of the tabernacle cloth. 
 V. Symmetry of the proposed arrangement, 
 VI. Zhe Court, 
 
 The chief portions of the structure are 
 described with remarkable clearness in Exodus 
 xxvi. and a second time in ch, xxxvi. It 
 would however seem that those parts only are 
 distinctly mentioned which formed visible 
 features in the completed fabric. Mere details 
 of construction were most probably carried 
 out according to the mechanical usage of the 
 time. | 
 
 If we take this for granted, the sacred text ° 
 
 appears to furnish sufficient information to 
 enable us to realize with confidence the form 
 
 and the general arrangements of the Tabernacle 
 as well as of its Court. But the subject has 
 been encumbered ever since the time of Philo? 
 with certain traditional notions which are op- 
 posed not only to the words of Exodus, but 
 to the plainest principles of constructive art. 
 
 I 
 
 It has been already stated? that three princi- 
 pal parts of the Sanctuary are clearly distin- 
 guished in the Hebrew, though they are con- 
 founded in most versions. ‘These parts are— 
 
 1, THE DWELLING PLACE, or THE TA- 
 BERNACLE, strictly so called; in Hebrew, 
 hammishkan (}3W1Di3) [note on xxvi. T]. 
 
 2. The TENT, in Heb. obel (Dn). 
 
 3. The CovERING, in Heb. mikseh (ADD) 
 
 1 ¢Vit. Mos.’ III. 4 sq. 
 2 Introd, Note to chap. xxvi. 
 
EXODUS) XXVE 
 
 t. The materials for THE MISHKAN were 
 a great cloth of woven work figured with 
 Cherubim measuring forty cubits by twenty- 
 eight cubits, and a quadrangular enclosure of 
 wood, open at one end, ten cubits in height, 
 ten cubits in width and thirty cubits in length. 
 
 The size of the Tabernacle cloth is indicated 
 beyond the reach of doubt by the number and 
 dimensions of the ten breadths (or ‘‘curtains’’) 
 of which it consisted?. ‘The size of the 
 wooden enclosure is made out almost as cer- 
 tainly from the number and measurements of 
 the boards*. 
 
 The boards were set upright, each of them 
 being furnished at its lower extremity with two 
 tenons which fitted into mortices in two heavy 
 bases of silver. ‘The whole of these bases 
 ‘placed side by side probably formed a con- 
 tinuous wall-plinth®. The boards were fur- 
 nished with rings or loops of gold so fixed as 
 to form rows, when the boards were set up, 
 and through these rings bars were thrust. 
 There were five bars for each side of the 
 ‘structure and five for the back*. ‘The middle 
 bar of each wall ‘‘was to reach from end to 
 end,” and this plainly distinguished it from the 
 other four bars. It is inferred with great pro- 
 ‘bability that this middle bar was twice as 
 Jong as the others, that there were three rows 
 of rings, and that the half of each wall was 
 fastened together by two of the shorter bars, 
 one near the top, the other near the bottom, 
 while the two halves were united into a whole 
 by the middle bar reaching from end to end®. 
 Thus each wall must have been furnished 
 with four short bars and one long one. 
 Each of the rings near the top and the bottom 
 of the two corner boards was shaped in some 
 way so as to receive the ends of two bars, 
 one belonging to the back, the other to the 
 side, meeting at a right angle, In this way 
 the walls were ‘‘coupled together” at the 
 corners ®, 
 
 There is nothing said from which we can 
 decide whether the rings and bars were on the 
 outside or the inside of.the wooden structure. 
 From the rich materials of which they were 
 made, it seems not unlikely that they con- 
 stituted an ornamental feature on the inside. 
 It may be added, that on the inside they 
 would tend to make the structure firm more 
 than on the outside. 
 
 So far it is not difficult to see nearly what 
 THE MISHKAN must have been. But it is 
 not so easy to determine the way in which the 
 great figured cloth that belonged to it was 
 arranged. ‘The question must be considered 
 in connection with the description of the parts 
 of the ‘TENT. 
 
 1 Ex, xxvi. 1—6; xxxvi. 8—13. 
 2 See on Ex. xxvi. 18, 
 3 See on xxvi. 19. 
 - 4 Ex, xxvi. 26—28; xxxvi. 3I—33. 
 5 See on Ex. xxvi. 28, and woodcut, p. 377. 
 6 Ex. xxvi. 243 XXXVI. 29. 
 
 re) 
 
 There is another difficulty, by far less easy 
 of solution, which may be stated here. It 
 affects the internal arrangement. ‘The vail 
 which separated the Most Holy Place from 
 the Holy Place was suspended from golden 
 hooks attached to four pillars overlaid with 
 gold, standing upon silver bases. But the 
 position of these pillars is not mentioned in 
 Exodus. It is indeed said that the vail was 
 hung ‘‘ under the taches’.” Now the taches 
 of the tabernacle cloth must have been fifteen 
 cubits from the back of the Mishkan, that is, 
 half way between its back and front. But 
 according to Philo, Josephus, and all tradi- 
 tion, supported by every consideration of 
 probability, the vail was ten cubits, not 
 fifteen, from the back, and the Holy of 
 Holies was a cubical chamber of correspond- 
 ing measurement. ‘The statement that the 
 vail was hung ‘“‘under the taches” remains 
 unexplained. But this difficulty is by no 
 means such as to be set in opposition to any 
 view that may meet all other conditions ex- 
 pressed or involved in the narrative. 
 
 2. ‘The TENT is described as consisting of 
 a great tent-cloth of goats’ hair, which, ac- 
 cording to the number and dimensions of its 
 breadths, was forty-four cubits by thirty§, 
 and five pillars overlaid with gold standing 
 on bases of bronze, and furnished with golden 
 hooks from which was suspended the curtain 
 that served to close the entrance of the Tent. 
 
 3. Of the COVERING of rams’ skins and 
 tachash skins, nothing whatever is said except 
 as regards the materials of which it was com- 
 posed 19, 
 
 ii, 
 
 It has been usual to represent the Tabernacle 
 as consisting of the wooden structure which 
 has been described, with the masses of drapery 
 and skins thrown over it ‘‘as a pall is thrown 
 over a coffin,” There was first the figured 
 
 7 Ex. xxvi. 33. This is not mentioned in ch. 
 XXxxvi., where the manufacture of the parts, and 
 not their arrangement, is spoken of. It has been 
 imagined that the ¢ackes were the same as the 
 hooks from which the vail was actually hung 
 (Ex. xxvi. 32), But the words are quite dis- 
 tinct. The word rendered éache is keres (D2), 
 
 which is supposed to be derived from a root 
 which signifies to bind; that rendered oof, 
 is vav (1}), which is the name of the Hebrew 
 
 letter shaped like a hook suited for hanging 
 anything on (3); its origin is unknown, eves 
 is used only in reference to the taches of the 
 tabernacle-cloth and of the tent-cloth of the 
 Sanctuary (Ex. xxvi. 6, 33, &c.), and vay only 
 in reference to the hooks of the vail and of the 
 tent-curtain. 
 
 ‘8 Ex. xxvi.. 7—133 xxxvi. 14—18, 
 
 9 Ex. xxvi. 36, 373 XXxxvi. 37, 38. 
 
 10 Ex, xxvi, 143 XXXVi. 19, See on xxv. 5. 
 
 ct 
 
 Or 
 
376 
 
 cloth recognized as part of THE MISHKAN, 
 then the goats’ hair cloth of the TENT, and 
 then the twofold COVERING of skins. 
 
 A modification of this arrangement was sug- 
 gested by Vater and adopted by Bahr, which 
 has the advantage of displaying the figured 
 cloth and of connecting it more strictly with 
 the Mishkan, though in no very graceful or 
 convenient manner. It was supposed that 
 this cloth was strained over the top of the 
 structure like a ceiling and fastened to the top 
 of the boards in some way, so as to hang 
 down and cover the walls on the inside as a 
 tapestry, leaving a cubit at the bases of the 
 boards bare, to show as a sort of skirting. 
 
 With the exception of certain expressions 
 in Josephus’, the whole current of opinion 
 seems to have been in favour of this general 
 arrangement of the parts of the ‘Tabernacle. 
 But it should be kept in view that the subject 
 is one in which tradition cannot be of much 
 value. We may allow that it is just possible, 
 though by no means probable, that some 
 points of detail besides what are actually 
 recorded, or some special knowledge of the 
 meaning of technical terms, may have been 
 handed down from the time of Moses. But 
 in a case of this kind we certainly need not 
 hesitate to set tradition aside, whenever it is 
 in conflict either with the letter of Scripture, 
 or with reasonable probability. 
 
 The objections to the common theory are 
 these: — 
 
 1, ‘The arrangement proposed makes out 
 the fabric to have been unsightly in its form 
 
 EXODUS. XXVI. 
 
 and to have had a great part of the beauty of 
 its materials entirely concealed. 
 
 2. It would be quite impossible to strain 
 drapery over a space of fifteen feet, so as to 
 prevent it from heavily sagging; and no flat 
 roof of such materials could by any means be 
 rendered proof against the weather. 
 
 3. It is hard to assign any use to the 
 pins and cords of the ‘Tabernacle* (which 
 would be essential in the construction of a 
 tent®) if the curtains and skins were merely 
 thrown over the woodwork and allowed to 
 hang down on each side. 
 
 4. ‘The shelter of the Mishkan is always 
 called in Hebrew by a name which, in its 
 strict use, can denote nothing but a tent, pro- 
 perly so called, of cloth or skins. 
 
 5. An essential part of the Tent was 
 the row of five pillars at its entrance®: if we 
 suppose these five pillars to have stood just 
 in front of the Mishkan, they must have been 
 strangely out of symmetry with the four 
 pillars of the vail, and the middle pillar must 
 have stood needlessly and inconveniently in the 
 way of the entrance. 
 
 Ill. 
 
 We are indebted to Mr Fergusson’ for 
 what may be regarded as a satisfactory recon- 
 struction of the Sanctuary in all its main par- 
 ticulars. He holds that what sheltered the 
 
 Mishkan was actually a ‘Tent of ordinary 
 form, such as common sense and practical 
 experience would suggest as best suited for 
 the purpose. 
 
 According to this view the five pillars at 
 the entrance of the tent* were graduated 
 as they would naturally be at the entrance of 
 any large tent of the best form, the tallest one 
 being in the middle to support one end of a 
 ridge-pole. It has been already observed 
 
 1 
 
 2 ¢Symbolik,’ 1. p. 63. 
 2 See p. 379. 
 3 Ex. xxvi. -37. 
 
 that the descriptions in Exodus appear to pass 
 over all particulars of the construction except 
 
 4 See Ex. xxvii. 19; xxxv. 18. The word 
 ‘*tabernacle” (mishka), in these places, evi- 
 dently includes the Tent as well as the Mishkan 
 itself. See note on Ex. xxvi. 1. 
 
 5 Cf. Jer. x. 20. 6 Ex. xxvi. 373 Xxxvi. 38, 
 
 _7 Smith’s ‘Dict. of the Bible,’ Art. Zemfle.— 
 ‘¢ The Holy Sepulchre and the Temple,” 1865. 
 
EXODUS, XXVI. : 
 
 those which formed visible features in the 
 fabric. On this ground we may be allowed 
 to suppose that there was not only a ridge- 
 pole, but a series of pillars at the back of the 
 Tent corresponding in height with those at 
 the front. Such a ridge-pole, which must 
 have been sixty feet in length1, would have 
 required support, and this might have been 
 afforded by light rafters resting on the top 
 of the boards, or, as is more in accordance 
 with the usage of tent architecture, by a 
 plain pole in the middle of the structure. 
 Over this framing of wood-work the tent- 
 cloth of goats’ hair was strained with its cords 
 and tent-pins in the usual way. ‘There must 
 also have been a back-cloth suspended from 
 the pillars at the back. The heads of the 
 pillars appear to have been united by con- 
 necting rods (in our version, ‘ fillets”) over- 
 laid with gold. [See xxxvi. 38.] 
 
 = 
 TS 6, 
 
 | 
 
 t 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 In this cut the woodwork of the Tent and 
 ‘Tabernacle which is described in the text is 
 represented, the assumed positions of the por- 
 tions that are not described being shown by 
 dotted lines. 
 
 Above the tent-cloth of goats’ hair was 
 spread the covering of red rams’ skins. Mr 
 Fergusson conceives that the covering of 
 tachash skins? above this did not cover the 
 whole roof, but served only as ‘“‘ a coping or 
 ridge-piece” to protect the crest of the roof, 
 
 1 Mr Fergusson considers that ‘‘the middle 
 bar in the midst of the boards” (Ex. xxvi. 28; 
 XXxvi. 33) was the ridge-pole, and he would 
 render the verse, ‘‘ And the middle bar which 
 is between the boards shall reach from end to 
 end.” But even if this rendering is allowable, 
 we venture to think that the expression ‘‘ from 
 end to end” cannot, according to the context, 
 refer to the Tent, but only to the wooden 
 part of the Mishkan (see Plan, p. 378). More- 
 over, the methodical arrangement of the descrip- 
 tions would be disturbed by the mention of the 
 
 ridge-pole in Ex. xxvi. 28 and in xxxvi. 33. It 
 ‘could only be introduced in proper order in 
 connection either with the cloth of the Tent 
 (after xxvi. 13 and xxxvi. 18), or with its five 
 pillars (after xxvi. 37 and xxxvi. 36). As how- 
 ever, according to the view here given, there 
 must have been a ridge-pole of some sort, the 
 question involves no essential particular of the 
 construction of the fabric. See on xxvi. 28. 
 
 - 2 Ex, xxvi. 143; xxxvi. 19. See note on xxv, 5. 
 
 IV. 
 
 The next inquiry relates to the position of 
 the ‘Tabernacle-cloth of fine linen and coloured 
 yarns. 
 
 It is evident that the relation in which the 
 measurement of the tabernacle-cloth stood to 
 that of the tent-cloth had an important bear- 
 ing on the place of each of them in the struc- 
 ture. ‘The tent-cloth is said to have extended 
 a cubit on each side beyond the tabernacle- 
 cloth’, and it appears to have extended two 
 cubits at the back and front’. It would 
 appear then that the tent-cloth was laid over 
 the tabernacle-cloth so as to allow the excess 
 of the dimensions of the former to be equally 
 divided between the two sides and between 
 the back and front. We may from these 
 particulars infer that the tabernacle-cloth 
 served as a lining to the other, and that they 
 were both extended over the ridge-pole. In 
 this way, the effect would have been produced 
 of an ornamented open roof extending the 
 length of the Tent. 
 
 V. 
 
 Mr Fergusson has pointed out the very re- 
 markable consistency of the measurements of 
 the different parts, if we accept this mode of 
 putting them together. He assumes the angle 
 formed by the roof to have been a right angle, 
 as a reasonable and usual angle for such a 
 roof, and this brings the only measurements 
 which appear at first sight to be abnormal, 
 into harmony. Every measurement given in 
 the text is a multiple of five cubits, except 
 the width of the tabernacle-cloth, which is 
 twenty-eight cubits, and the length of the tent- 
 cloth, which is forty-four cubits. With a 
 right angle at the ridge, each side of the slope 
 as shewn in this section would be within a 
 
 5 CUBITS X SCUBITS 
 
 20 cuBITS. = a 
 g 5 
 Oo (o) 
 n Ww? 
 s 
 
 10 CUBITS yo CUBIT 
 
 fraction of fourteen cubits (14.08), half the 
 width of the tabernacle-cloth. ‘The slope is 
 here carried just five cubits beyond the wooden 
 walls and to within just five cubits of the 
 ground. ‘The tent-cloth would hang down in 
 a valance on each side, one cubit in depth ® - 
 
 % Ex. xxvi. 13. 
 4. Ex, xxxvi. 9, 13. 
 Ori ay XXVio 13s 
 
78 
 
 If we allow the tabernacle-cloth, according 
 to this arrangement, to determine the length of 
 the Tent as well as its width, we obtain an area 
 for the structure of forty cubits by twenty. 
 The tent-cloth would of course overhang this 
 at the back and front by two cubits, that is, 
 half a breadth!, ‘The wooden structure being 
 placed within the Tent, there would be a space 
 all round it of five cubits in width. ‘This is 
 shown in this Plan, in which one half repre- 
 sents the ground-plan and the other half the 
 extended tent-cloth. 
 
 7 
 
 rae wl 
 
 qf 
 
 ee Ss SN as SSS SER a ES SS 
 
 i 
 i 
 
 i 
 i 
 
 Alt 
 Whi 
 
 : 
 
 ——— 
 
 | 
 
 iL 
 
 ve 
 a 
 
 | 
 | 
 | 
 
 ‘The five pillars, to reach across the front of 
 the ‘Tent, must have stood five cubits apart. 
 Their heads were united by connecting rods 
 (‘‘fillets”) overlaid with gold (Exod. xxxvi, 
 38). The space immediately within them, 
 according to Mr Fergusson, formed a porch 
 of five cubits in depth, ‘The spaces at the 
 sides and back may have been wholly or in 
 part covered in for the use of the officiating 
 priests, like the small apartments which in 
 after times skirted three sides of the Temple. 
 It was probably here that those portions of 
 the sacrifices were eaten which were not to 
 be cairied out of the sacred precinct?, 
 
 The exact symmetrical relation which the 
 dimensions of the Temple bore to those of the 
 Tabernacle is not only striking in itself, but it 
 bears a strong testimony to the correctness of 
 Mr Fergusson’s theory as regards those mea- 
 
 1, Ex. xxvi. 9, 12. 
 
 2 See cut, p. 376. 
 
 3 Lev. vi. 16, 26, &c. We may infer that 
 priests also lodged in them from Ley, viii, 33; 
 Tidy Bad, Se 
 
 EXODUS i xx 
 
 surements which are not directly stated in the 
 text, but are made out by inference from 
 the theory. Each chief measurement of the 
 ‘Temple was just twice that of the Tabernacle, 
 ‘The Most Holy Place, a square of ten cubits 
 in the Tabernacle+, was one of twenty cubits 
 in the Temple: the Holy Place, in each case, 
 was a corresponding double square. ‘The 
 
 Porch, which was five cubits deep in the 
 ‘Tabernacle, was ten cubits in the Temple; 
 the side spaces, taking account of the thick- 
 ness of the walls of the Temple, were re- 
 
 ees ts 7) Bigs 
 
 : 
 
 J 
 S 10 30 40 50 Cubits, 
 i 
 
 \ ‘ a | 
 
 10 20 30 40 50 60 yo 7S Feet, 
 
 spectively five cubits and ten cubits in width; 
 the height of the ridge-pole of the Tabernacle 
 was fifteen cubits, that of the roof of the 
 Holy Place in the Temple thirty cubits, 
 
 * It has already been observed that the length 
 of the Most Holy Place is not given in Exodus; 
 but ten cubits is universally accepted on the 
 ground of inference. See §I. 
 
 > 1 K. vi. 2. The analogy here pointed 
 out seems to shew the fitness of the word Zent 
 (Heb. ofel, wrongly rendered ‘‘tabernacle’’) as 
 applied to the Temple in the vision of Ezekiel 
 xli, 1), 
 
Ve I—4. |]. 
 
 ‘Whether we believe the statements of Jose- 
 phus to contain any elements of genuine 
 tradition or not, it is worth noticing that in 
 certain particulars he strikingly countenances 
 the views of Mr Fergusson. He speaks of 
 the ‘Tabernacle as consisting of three parts. 
 The third part was the Most Holy Place, the 
 second part the Holy Place; and he seems to 
 intimate that the remaining, or first part, was 
 the entrance with its five pillars. He also 
 says that the tent-curtain was so arranged in 
 the front as to be Jike a gable and a porch 
 (deropatt mapamAnowoyv Kat macrad:)}. 
 
 It may perhaps be doubted whether there 
 is, within the entire range of ancient literature 
 (unless we should except the works of strictly 
 technical writers), a description of any struc- 
 ture more clear and practical than that of 
 the Tabernacle contained in the xxvith and 
 
 1 ¢ Ant,’ III. 6. § 4. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 1 The altar of burnt offering, with the vessels 
 thereof. 9 The court of the tabernacle in- 
 closed with hangings and pillars. 18 The 
 measure of the court, 20 The oil for the 
 lamp. 
 
 ND thou shalt make an altar of 
 
 shittim wood, five cubits long, 
 
 and five cubits broad; the altar shall 
 
 be foursquare: and the height thereof 
 shall be three cubits. 
 
 Pep. 4 0 OCR RE D.C. Mi 
 
 xxxvith chapters of Exodus. Mr Fergusson’s 
 testimony on this head deserves to be quoted; 
 ‘¢it seems to me clear that it must have been 
 written by some one who had seen the Taber- 
 nacle standing. No one could have worked 
 it out in such detail without ocular demon- 
 stration of the way in which the parts would 
 fit together.” 
 
 ad 
 
 The second Plan in the preceding page ex- 
 hibits the Tabernacle in its Court, with the 
 cords and tent-pins in their proper places, 
 as determined by Mr Fergusson in accord- 
 ance with the practice of tent-architecture. 
 It will be seen that the width of the Tent 
 is the same as that of the entrance to the 
 Court, which is a coincidence connected with 
 the harmony of the arrangement that well 
 deserves to be noticed. 
 
 2. And thou shalt make the horns 
 of it upon the four corners thereof: 
 his horns shall be of the same: and 
 thou shalt overlay it with brass. 
 
 3 And thou shalt make his pans to 
 receive his ashes, and his shovels, and 
 his basons, and his fleshhooks, and his 
 firepans: all the vessels thereof thou 
 shalt make of brass. 
 
 4 And thou shalt make for it a 
 
 CuHap, XXVII. 
 The Altar of Burnt-offering. 
 1—8. (Cf. xxxvili, I—7.) 
 
 The great Altar which stood in.the Court 
 immediately in front of the Tabernacle was 
 commonly called the ALTAR OF BURNT-OF- 
 FERING, because on it were burnt the whole 
 Burnt-offerings, and all those parts of the 
 other animal sacrifices which were offered to 
 the Lord. It was also called the BRAZEN 
 ALTAR, because it was covered with bronze, 
 in distinction from the Golden Altar, or Altar 
 of Incense (Exod, xxxix. 38, 39, xl. 5, 6). 
 
 1. an altar] See Note at the end of ch. xl. 
 
 il 
 , Q. his horns shall be of the same| ‘These 
 horns were projections pointing upwards in 
 the form either of a small obelisk, or of the 
 horn of an ox, They were to be actually 
 parts of the Altar, not merely superadded to 
 it, On them the blood of the Sin-offering 
 was smeared (Exod. xxix. 12; Lev. iv. 7, 
 Vili, 15, ix. 9, xvi. 18). To take hold of 
 therh appears to have been regarded as an 
 emphatic mode of laying claim to the nght 
 of Sanctuary (Exod. xxi. 14; 1 Ki, 50), 
 
 3. pans to receive his ashes| Rather pots 
 as in xxxviil. 3; 1 K. vil. 45. On the use to 
 which these pots were put in dispusing of the 
 ashes of the Altar, see Lev. i. 16.—The Heb. 
 word here rendered to receive his ashes, is re- 
 markable, In its derivation it is connected 
 with fat, and it is never used in reference to 
 any ashes except those of the Altar. It occurs 
 Num. iv. 13, and Ps, xx. 3; where see margin. 
 But all authorities are agreed as to what it 
 denotes in these places, 
 
 his basons| According to the etymology of 
 the name (from zdrak, to scatter) it is in- 
 ferred that these vessels were used for receiv- 
 ing the blood of the victims and casting it 
 upon the Altar [see xxiv. 6, Lev. i. 5, &c.]. 
 
 his flesbhooks| These were for adjusting 
 the pieces of the victim upon the Altar [cf. 
 Ristoite © |x 
 
 his firepans| The same word is rendered 
 snuffdishes, XXV. 38, XXXVil. 23:  censers, 
 Lev. x. 1, xvi. 12, Num. iv. 14, xvi. 6, &c, 
 These utensils appear to have been shallow 
 metal vessels which served either to catch the 
 snuff of the lamps when they were trimmed, 
 or to burn small quantities of incense, No- 
 
 379 
 
80 
 
 grate of network of brass; and upon 
 
 the net shalt thou make four brasen 
 rings in the four corners thereof. 
 
 5 And thou shalt put it under the 
 compass of the altar beneath, that the 
 net may be even to the midst of the 
 Altar 
 
 6 And thou shalt make staves for 
 the altar, staves of shittim- wood, and 
 overlay them with brass. 
 
 7 And the staves shall be put into 
 the rings, and the staves shall be upon 
 the two sides of the altar, to bear it. 
 
 thing however is said of the burning of in- 
 cense in immediate connection with the 
 Brazen Altar, and it has been supposed that 
 the firepans were employed merely to carry 
 burning embers from the Brazen Altar to the 
 Altar of Incense, and that this use furnishes 
 their only claim to the name of censers. See 
 on Num. xvi. 6. 
 
 5. the compass of the altar| ‘This appears 
 to have been a shelf, or projecting ledge, of 
 convenient width, carried round the Altar 
 half way between the top and the base, on 
 which the priests probably stood when they 
 tended the fire or arranged the parts of the 
 victims. It was supported all round its 
 outer edge by a vertical net-like grating of 
 bronze that rested on the ground. ‘The name 
 is a peculiar one, occurring only in this 
 application and only in one other place, 
 XXxvili. 4. But there appears to be scarcely 
 a doubt as to its meaning. 
 
 8. Hollow with boards] Slabs, or planks, 
 rather than boards. ‘The word is that which 
 is used for the stone tables of the Law (xxiv. 
 12, XXxi. 18), not that applied to the boards 
 of the Tabernacle (xxvi. 15). 
 
 There has been considerable difference of 
 opinion regarding some points in the descrip- 
 tion of the Brazen Altar, but the most pro- 
 bable account of it seems to be this. It was a 
 hollow casing, formed of stout acacia planks 
 covered with plates of bronze, seven feet six. 
 in length and width and four feet six in 
 height. Jewish as well as Christian authori- 
 ties have supposed that, when it was fixed for 
 use, it was filled up with earth or rough 
 stones. If we connect this suggéstion with 
 the old rule regarding the Altar of earth and 
 the Altar of stone given in chap. xx. 24, 25, 
 the woodwork might in fact be regarded 
 merely as the case of the Altar on which the 
 victims were actually burned. ‘The shelf 
 round the sides (v. 5) was required as a 
 stage for the priests to enable them to carry 
 on their work conveniently on the top of the 
 Altar,’ Hence it is said of Aaron that he 
 
 EXODUS, XX V1. 
 
 [v..5—IT, - 
 
 8 Hollow with boards shalt thou 
 
 make it: as ‘it was shewed thee in the t ion 
 (- 
 
 mount, so shall they make zt. 
 g @ And thou shalt make the court 
 of the tabernacle: for the south side 
 
 southward there shall be hangings for | 
 
 the court of fine twined linen of an 
 hundred cubits long for one side: 
 
 10 And the twenty pillars thereof . 
 
 and their twenty sockets shall be of 
 brass; the hooks of the pillars and — 
 their fillets shall be of silver. 
 
 11 And likewise for the north side 
 
 came down from the Altar (Lev. ix. 22). 
 According to rabbinical tradition, there was 
 a slope of earth banked up for the priest to 
 ascend to the stage (cf. Ex. xx. 26), Such 
 a slope could only have been at the south 
 side, as the place of ashes was on the east 
 (Lev. i, 16), the west side was opposite. the 
 Tabernacle, and on the north the victims 
 appear to have been slain close to the Altar 
 [see on Lev. i. rr]. The rings for the staves 
 for carrying the Altar were attached to the 
 corners of the grating (v. 4), which must 
 have been proportionally strong. | 
 The Altar of Solomon’s Temple is de- 
 scribed 2 Chro, iv. 1. It was twenty cubits 
 in length and breadth and ten cubits in 
 height; so that it was unlike the Altar of the 
 ‘Tabernacle, not only in its magnitude but in 
 
 its proportions. ‘The Altar erected by Herod | 
 
 is said by Josephus to have been fifty cubits 
 square and fifteen cubits high (‘ Bell. Jud.’ v. 
 515°). 
 
 as it was shewed thee in the mount] See 
 ON XXV, 40. 
 
 The Court of the Tabernacle. 
 9—19. (Cf. xxxviii, g—20.) 
 9. the south side southward] the south 
 
 side ontheright. See on xxvi, 18. 
 Jine twined linen] See on xxvi. I. 
 
 10. sockets] bases. See onxxvi.19, 
 jilets| Rather, connecting rods, So the 
 Targums. ‘The Hebrew word is peculiar, 
 and may mean any sort of bonds or fastenings, 
 What are spoken of in this place appear to 
 have been curtain-rods of silver connecting 
 the heads of the pillars. The hangings were 
 attached to the pillars by the silver hooks; 
 but the length of the space between the pillars 
 would render it most probable that they were 
 also in some way fastened to these rods, The 
 capitals of the pillars were overlaid with 
 silver, as we learn from chap, xxxviii. 17, 
 
 ll. sockets] bases. 
 Jillets]. connecting rods, 
 
 any 
 
Vv, 12—19.] 
 
 in length there shall be hangings of an 
 hundred cubits long, and his twenty 
 pillars and their twenty sockets of 
 brass; the hooks of the pillars and 
 their fillets of silver. 
 
 12 4 And for the breadth of the 
 court on the west side shall be hang- 
 ings of fifty cubits: their pillars ten, 
 and their sockets ten. 
 
 13 And the breadth of the court on 
 theeastsideeastward shall be fifty cubits. 
 - 14 The hangings of one side of the 
 gate shall be fifteen cubits: their pillars 
 three, and their sockets three. 
 
 15 And on the other side shall be 
 hangings fifteen cubits: their pillars 
 three, and their sockets three. 
 
 13. the east side eastward| on the front 
 side eastward, ‘The front [see on xxvi. 
 18, cf. v. 9]. 
 
 14, 15,16. See on v. 18, note (c). 
 
 16. an hanging) The Hebrew word is 
 not the same as that rendered Aanging in vv, 
 II, 12, 14, 15, and it would be better repre- 
 sented by curtain. It strictly denotes an 
 entrance curtain, which, unlike the hangings 
 at the sides and back of the Court, could be 
 drawn up, or aside, at pleasure. ‘The words 
 are rightly distinguished in our Bible in Num. 
 ill. 26. 
 
 wrought with needlework| the work of 
 the embroiderer. See on xxvi. 36, xxxv. 
 35. On the materials, see xxv. 4. 
 
 sockets] bases, 
 
 17. filleted with silver] connected with 
 silver rods. See on w, Io. 
 
 18. (a) The size and general construc- 
 tion of the Court of the Tabernacle are de- 
 scribed in such a way as to leave no im- 
 portant doubt. Its area was one hundred 
 and fifty feet (taking the cubit at eighteen 
 inches) in length, and seventy-five feet in 
 width, It was enclosed by hangings of fine 
 linen suspended from pillars seven feet six 
 inches in height, and standing seven feet six 
 inches apart. ‘These pillars were connected 
 at their heads by silver rods [see on v. 10]; 
 they had silver hooks for the attachment of 
 the hangings, and their capitals were overlaid 
 with silver; they stood on bases of bronze. 
 At the east end of the enclosure the linen 
 hangings on each side were continued for 
 twenty-two feet six inches, and the inter- 
 mediate space of thirty feet was the entrance, 
 which was closed by an embroidered curtain 
 (vv. 14, 15,16). ‘The pillars were kept firm 
 by cords and tent-pins of bronze [see v. 19, 
 cf, Num, iii. 26]. 
 
 Peery a Tl, 
 
 16 { And for the gate of the court 
 shall be an hanging of twenty cubits, 
 of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and 
 fine twined linen, wrought with needle- 
 work: and their pillars shall be four, 
 and their sockets four. 
 
 17 All the pillars round about the 
 court shall be filleted with silver; their 
 hooks shall be of silver, and their 
 sockets of brass. 
 
 18 4 The length of the court shall 
 be an hundred cubits, and the breadth 
 
 ' fifty every where, and the height five 1 Heb. 
 cubits of fine twined linen, and their?” 
 
 sockets of brass. 
 19 All the vessels of the tabernacle 
 in all the service thereof, and all the 
 
 (4) The position of the ‘Tabernacle in the 
 Court could hardly have been in the middle, 
 as Josephus imagined (‘ Ant.’ 111. 6. § 3). Itis 
 most probable that its place was, as Philo 
 conceived (‘Vit, Mos,’ 111.7), equidistant from 
 the west, the north and the south walls of 
 the Court, so as to leave between it and the 
 entrance of the Court a suitable space for 
 the Brazen Altar and the Laver. See Note 
 at the end of ch. xxvi. with the plan of 
 the Court, according to Fergusson, in which 
 
 the feasibility of this arrangement is strikingly 
 
 apparent, 
 
 (c) There has been a difficulty raised re- 
 garding the number and distribution of the 
 pillars of the Court. Knobel, taking up the 
 notion of Philo and some other interpreters, 
 supposes that the number was fifty-six, each 
 corner pillar being reckoned both as one for 
 the side and as one for the end. Keil, who 
 contends for sixty as the number, has not 
 made the matter much clearer by his mode 
 of explanation, The mode of stating the 
 numbers involved in the arrangement in vv, 
 Io, II, 12, 14, 15, 16 is perhaps a technical 
 one, ‘Taking it for granted that the number 
 sixty, as given in those verses, is the true one, 
 and that the Court measured precisely one 
 hundred cubits by fifty, the pillars must have 
 stood five cubits apart, which is in accord- 
 ance with the general symmetry of the Sanc- 
 tuary [see Note at the end of ch. xxvi. § V.]. 
 If we may suppose the numbers, referring to 
 each side of the enclosure, to have belonged 
 to the spaces between the pillars rather than 
 to the pillars themselves, the statements be- 
 come clear, in reference both to the sides 
 with their continuous hangings, and to the 
 front where there was the entrance, See Mr 
 Fergusson’s plan, p. 378. 
 
 19. All the vessels, &c.] Our version here 
 follows the Vulgate, and is obviously wrong. 
 
Os 
 
 t Heb. 
 
 to ascend 
 
 up. 
 
 82 
 
 pins thereof, and all the pins of the 
 court, shall be of brass. 
 
 20 4 And thou shalt command the 
 children of Israel, that they bring thee 
 pure oil olive beaten for the light, to 
 cause the lamp ‘to burn always. 
 
 21 In the tabernacle of the congre- 
 gation without the vail, which zs before 
 the testimony, Aaron and his sons 
 shall order it from evening to morning 
 before the Lorn: 2¢ shall be a statute 
 for ever unto their generations on the 
 
 behalf of the children of Israel. 
 
 We know that the vessels of the Tabernacle 
 were of gold, xxv. 29, 39. The Hebrew 
 word rendered vesse/s means in the broadest 
 sense utensils: it is in different places rendered 
 JSurniture, stuff, sacks, jewels, weapons, &c, 
 In the same connection as in this place, it is 
 not incorrectly represented by instruments, 
 Num, iii, 8. The verse might be thus trans- 
 lated; All the tools of the Tabernacle 
 used in all its workmanship, and all 
 its tent-pins, and all the tent-pins 
 of the court, shall be of bronze,—The 
 working tools of the Sanctuary were most 
 probably such things as axes, knives, ham- 
 mers, &c, that were employed in making, 
 repairing, setting up and taking down the 
 structure, Cf. Num, iii. 36. 
 
 the tabernacle] Heb. hammishkan. ‘The 
 word is here to be taken as including both 
 the Mishkan and the Tent, as in Num. i, 51, 
 53, &c. [see on xxvi. 1], 
 
 the pins thereof,...the pins of the court] The 
 Hebrew word is the regular name for tent-pins, 
 
 The Lamps of the Sanctuary. 
 VV. 20, 21. 
 
 It is not quite easy to see the reason of 
 the insertion of these verses in this place. 
 The passage, with unimportant verbal altera- 
 tions, is repeated Lev. xxiv. 2, 3, where it is 
 connected in a natural manner with the rules 
 for the supplying and ordering of the Shew- 
 bread. Cf. Exod, xxv, 6, 373 xxxv. 14, xl. 4, 
 745125, 
 
 20. pure oil olive beaten] The oil was to 
 be of the best kind. It is called beaten, be- 
 cause it was obtained by merely bruising the 
 olives in a mortar or mill, without the appli- 
 cation of heat. The finest oil is now thus 
 obtained from young fruit freshly gathered, 
 and hence it is sometimes distinguished as 
 *“cold drawn,” The inferior kind is expressed 
 from unselected fruit, under stronger pres- 
 sure, with the application of heat. : 
 
 the lamp] i.e. the lamps of the Golden 
 Candlestick, [See xxv, 37.] 
 
 EXODUS rx xy, 
 
 XXVIPE 
 
 [v. 20—r; 
 
 CHAPTER XXVIII. 
 
 1 Aaron and his sons are set apart for the 
 priest's office. 2 Holy garments are appointed. 
 6 The ephod. 15 The breastplate with twelve 
 precious stones. 30 The Urim and Thum: 
 mim. 31 The robe of the ephod, with pome- 
 granates and bells. 36 The plate of the mitre. 
 39 The embroidered coat. 40 The garments 
 Jor Aaron’s sons. 
 
 ND take thou unto thee Aaron. 
 thy brother, and his sons with 
 
 him, from among the children of Israel, 
 that he may minister unto me in the 
 priest’s office, even Aaron, Nadab and 
 
 to burn| The word is literally rendered in 
 the margin to ascend up. It should be ob- 
 served that it does not properly mean to burn 
 in the sense of to consume, and that it is the 
 word regularly used to express the action of 
 fire upon what was offered to Jehovah [see 
 on Ley. 1. 9]. 
 
 always] i.e, every night ‘‘from evening till 
 morning,” Cf, xxx. 8. 
 
 21. the tabernacle of the congregation] More 
 literally, the Tent of meeting [see Note 
 at the end of ch. xl. §II.]. This is the first 
 occurrence of this designation of the Taber- 
 nacle, 
 
 without the vail, which is before the testi- 
 mony | i.e. the Holy Place [see on xxv, 16]. 
 
 CHap. XXVIII. 
 THE INVESTITURE OF AARON AND HIS 
 SONS. 
 1—43 (Cf. xxxix. I—31). 
 
 Moses is now commanded to commit all that 
 pertains to the Offerings made to the Lord in 
 the Sanctuary to the exclusive charge of the 
 members of a single family, who were to hold 
 their office from generation to generation. In 
 the patriarchal times, the external rites of wor- 
 ship had generally been conducted by the head 
 of the tribe or family, in accordance with 
 the principle involved in the dedication of 
 the firstborn (Ex. xiii. 2; Num. iii. 12, 13). 
 Moses, as the divinely appointed and ac- 
 knowledged leader of the nation, had, on a 
 special occasion, appointed those who were to 
 offer sacrifice, and had himself sprinkled the 
 consecrating blood of the victims on the people 
 (xxiv. 5, 6, 8). On the completion of the 
 ‘Tabernacle, after Aaron and his sons had been 
 called to the priesthood, he took chief part in 
 the daily service of the Sanctuary (xl. 23—29, 
 31, 32) until the consecration of the family of 
 Aaron, on which occasion he appears to have 
 exercised the priest’s office for the last time 
 (Lev. viii. r4—29; cf. Ex. xxix. 10o—26). 
 The setting apart of the whole tribe of Levi 
 for the entire cycle of religious services is men- 
 tioned Num. iil. s—r3, viii. s—26, xviii. r—32. 
 
v. 2—5,.| 
 
 Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron’s 
 sons. 
 
 2, And thou shalt make holy gar- 
 ments for Aaron thy brother for glory 
 and for beauty. 
 
 3 And thou shalt speak unto all 
 that are wise hearted, whom I have 
 filled with the spirit of wisdom, that 
 they may make Aaron’s garments to 
 consecrate him, that he may minister 
 unto me in the priest’s office. 
 
 1. Nadab and Abihu, the two elder sons of 
 Aaron, had accompanied their father and the 
 seventy Elders when they went a part of the 
 way with Moses up the mountain (xxiv. 1, 9). 
 Soon after their consecration they were de- 
 stroyed for ‘‘ offering strange fire before the 
 Lord” (Lev. x. 1, 2). Eleazar and Ithamar 
 are here mentioned for the first time, except 
 in the genealogy, vi.23. Eleazar succeeded his 
 father in the High-priesthood, and was him- 
 self succeeded by his son Phinehas (Judg. xx. 
 28). But Eli, the next High-priest named in 
 the history, was of the line of Ithamar. The 
 representatives of both families held office at 
 once in the time of David. See 1 Chro. xxiv. 
 I—3; 2S. vill. 17. 
 
 83. wise hearted| ‘The heart was fre- 
 ‘quently spoken of as the seat of wisdom (Ex. 
 XXXI. 6, XXXKV. IO, 25, XXXVI.I1; Job ix. 4; 
 Prov. xi. 29, Xvi. 21, 23, &c.). ‘The same 
 notion is traced in the Latin phrase homo cor- 
 datus; also in the language of Homer, ‘II.’ 
 mega; © Od.) Vil. 82; XVIII. 344: ‘The 
 bowels, as distinguished from the heart, were 
 commonly recognized as the seat of the affec- 
 tions (Gen. xhii. 30; 1 K. iii. 26; Is. xiii. 15: 
 and, in the Hebrew text, Deut. xiii. 6; 2 S. 
 -XxIv. 14, &c. See also Luke i. 78; 2 Cor. 
 Vie 12,7 vil-- ts; Phil. i. 8, ii, x; . Philemon, 
 say Bits C9 
 
 the spirit of wisdom] See on xxxi. 3. What 
 may be especially noticed in this place is, that 
 the spirit of wisdom given by the. Lord is 
 spoken of as conferring practical skill in the 
 most general sense: those who possess it are 
 called because they possess it; they are not 
 first called and then endowed with it. 
 
 garments to consecrate him] ‘There is here 
 a solemn recognition of the significance of 
 an appointed official dress. It expresses that 
 the office is not created or defined by the man 
 himself (Heb. v. 4), but that he is invested 
 with it according to prescribed institution. 
 The rite of anointing was essentially connected 
 with investiture in the holy garments (xxix. 
 29, 303 xl. 12—15).—The history of all na- 
 tions shews the importance of these forms. As 
 time goes on, their ‘‘ ancient and well-noted 
 face” becomes more and more valuable as a 
 
 eo 1 Ur Xe WITT, 
 
 4 And these are the garments which 
 they shall make; a breastplate, and an 
 ephod, and a robe, and a broidered 
 coat, a mitre, and a girdle: and they 
 shall make holy garments for Aaron 
 thy brother, and his sons, that he 
 may minister unto me in the priest’s 
 office. 
 
 5 And they shall take gold, and 
 blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine 
 linen. 
 
 witness against restless longing for change. 
 The following points in this divinely ordained 
 investiture of the Priests of Jehovah seem to 
 be worthy of special notice in our own day:— 
 (1) there was nothing left to individual taste 
 or fancy, every point was authoritatively laid 
 down in minute detail: (2) the High-priest, 
 when performing his highest and holiest func- 
 tions, was attired in a plain white dress (Lev. 
 xvi. 4): (3) the only garments worn by the 
 other priests ‘‘for glory and for beauty” 
 (v. 40), when they were engaged in the ser- 
 vice of both the Golden Altar and the Brazen 
 Altar (see Lev. vi. 10), were also white, with 
 the exception of the Girdle (wv. 40): (4) there 
 were no changes in the dresses of the priests 
 at the three Great Festivals, nor any periodi- 
 cal change whatever, except when the High- 
 priest, on the Day of Atonement, put off his 
 robes of office for the dress of white linen. 
 
 4. There are here mentioned six articles 
 belonging to the official dress of the High- 
 priest, which are described in the verses that 
 follow; but the description does not follow 
 the order of this enumeration, and it com- 
 prises, in addition, the gold plate of the mitre 
 (v. 36) and the garments which were com- 
 mon to all the priests. 
 
 and his sons| ‘These, it is evident, were the 
 representatives of the family who, in the ages 
 that followed, inherited the High-priesthood 
 in succession. But the sons who were con- 
 secrated at this time with Aaron as common 
 priests, are designated in the same way in 
 v. 40 and elsewhere. 
 
 5. gold, and blue, &c.] the gold and 
 the blue and the scarlet and the fine 
 linen. ‘The definite article is prefixed to 
 each substantive to denote specially the quan- 
 tity and the quality of the material required 
 for the dresses. With the exception of the 
 gold, the materials were the same as those of 
 the tabernacle-cloth, the vail of the ‘Taber- 
 nacle and the entrance-curtain of the ‘Tent 
 (xxvi. 1, 31, 36. See on xxv. 4). The gold 
 was wrought into thin flat wires which could 
 either be woven with the woollen and linen 
 threads, or worked with the needle (see 
 
XXVIIL [v. 6—rr. 
 9 And thou shalt take two onyx 
 stones, and grave on them the names 
 of the children of Israel: 
 10 Six of their names on one stone, 
 and the other six names of the rest on 
 the other stone, according to their 
 birth. 
 11 *With the work of an engraver ¢ Wisd.18. 
 in stone, /ike the engravings of a signet, * 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 6 @ And they shall make the ephod 
 of gold, of blue, and of purple, of scarlet, 
 and fine twined linen, with cunning 
 work. 
 
 7 It shall have the two shoulder- 
 pieces thereof joined at the two edges 
 thereof; and so it shall be joined to- 
 gether. 
 
 8 And the "curious girdle of the 
 
 384 
 
 I Or, eme- 
 broidered. 
 
 ephod, which 7s upon it, shall be of 
 the same, according to the work there- 
 of; even of gold, of blue, and purple, 
 
 and scarlet, and fine twined linen. 
 
 xxxix. 3 and on xxxv. 35). In regard to the 
 mixture of linen and woollen threads in the 
 Ephod and other parts of the High-priest’s 
 dress, a difficulty seems to present itself in 
 connection with the law which forbad gar- 
 ments of linen and woollen mixed to be worn 
 by the Israelites (Lev. xix. 19; Deut. xxil. 11). 
 It has been conjectured that the coloured 
 threads here mentioned were not woollen but 
 dyed linen (Knobel). But see on Lev. xix. 19. 
 
 The Ephod. 
 6—12 (XXxix. 2—7). 
 
 6. the ephod| ‘The Hebrew word is here 
 retained, which, according to its etymology, 
 has the same breadth of meaning as our word 
 vestment. ‘The garment being worn over the 
 shoulders, the word is rendered by the LXX. 
 ém@pis (which occurs also Ecclus. xlv. 8), and 
 by the Vulgate superhumerale. It consisted of 
 blue, purple and scarlet yarn and “fine twined 
 linen” (on xxvi. 1) wrought together in work 
 of the skilled weaver (on xxvi. x and 
 XxXxv. 35). It was the distinctive vestment of 
 the High-priest, to which ‘‘the breastplate of 
 judgment” was attached (vv. 25—28). 
 
 7. From this verse, and from xxxix. 4, 
 it would seem that the Ephod consisted of two 
 principal pieces of cloth, one for the back and 
 the other for the front, joined together by 
 shoulder straps (see on v, 27). Below the 
 arms, probably just above the hips, the two 
 pieces were kept’ in place by a band attached 
 to one of the pieces, which is described in the 
 next verse. Most Jewish authorities have 
 thus understood the description. But Jose- 
 phus describes the Ephod as a tunic (yirwv) 
 having sleeves (‘ Ant.’ 11. 7. § 5). It is 
 just possible that the fashion of it may have 
 changed before the time of the historian. On 
 the respect in which this Ephod of the High- 
 priest was held, see 1 S. ii. 28, xiv. 3, xxi. 9, 
 Xxlii. 6, 9, xxx. 7. But an Ephod made of 
 linen appears to have been a recognized gar- 
 ment not only for the common priests (1 S. 
 xxl. 18) but also for those who were even 
 
 shalt thou engrave the two stones with 
 the names of the children of Israel: 
 thou shalt make them to be set in 
 ouches of gold. 
 
 temporarily engaged in the service of the 
 Sanctuary (x S. ii. 18; 2 S. vi. 143 1 Chro, 
 XV. 27). 
 
 8. the curious girdle of the ephod, which is 
 upon it, shall be of the same| ‘The meaning 
 might rather be expressed:—the band for 
 JSastening it, which is upon it, shall be of the 
 same work, of one piece with it. So de Wette, 
 Knobel, Zunz, Herx., &c, ‘This band being 
 woven on to one of the pieces of the Ephod 
 was passed round the body, and fastened by 
 buttons, or strings, or some other suitable 
 contrivance. 
 
 9. two onyx stones] The Hebrew name of 
 the stone here spoken of is shoham. It is uni-. 
 formly rendered onyx in our Bible and in the 
 Vulgate; Josephus calls it the sardonyx. The 
 LX X. and Philo, on the other hand, call it 
 the dery/. But the Greek translators are in- 
 consistent in translating the word in different 
 places, so that, as regards this question, no. 
 confidence can be placed in them. ‘The stone 
 was most likely one well adapted for engrav- 
 ing; in this respect the onyx is preferable to 
 the beryl. See on v. 17. 
 
 11. an engraver in stone] an artificer 
 in stone. See on xxxv. 35. 
 
 like the engravings of a signet] Cf. vv. 21, 
 36. ‘These words probably refer to a peculiar 
 way of shaping the letters, adapted for en- 
 graving on a hard substance.—-Seal engraving 
 on precious stones was practised in Egypt 
 from very remote times, and in Mesopotamia, 
 probably, from 2000 A.C. 
 
 ouches of gold| ‘The gold settings of the 
 engraved stones are here plainly denoted; but, 
 according to the derivation of the Hebrew 
 word, they seem to have been formed not of 
 solid pieces of metal, but of woven wire, 
 wreathed round the stones in what is called 
 cloisonnée work, a sort of filigree, often found 
 in Egyptian ornaments. Mr King conjectures 
 that these stones, as well as those on the 
 breastplate, were ‘‘in the form of ovals, or 
 rather ellipses, like the cartouches, containing 
 proper names, in hieroglyphic inscriptions.” 
 
Vv. 12—17.] ROMO 1 Seax Xs Vill I. 385 
 
 12 And thou shalt put the two 
 stones upon the shoulders of the ephod 
 for stones of memorial unto the chil- 
 dren of Israel: and Aaron shall bear 
 their names before the Lorp upon his 
 two shoulders for a memorial. 
 
 13 4 And thou shalt make ouches 
 of gold ; . 
 
 14 And two chains of pure gold at 
 the ends; of wreathen work shalt thou 
 make them, and fasten the wreathen 
 chains to the ouches. 
 
 work; after the work of the ephod 
 thou shalt make it; of gold, of blue, 
 and of purple, and of scarlet, and 
 of fine twined linen, shalt thou 
 make it. 
 
 16 Foursquare it shall be being 
 doubled; a span shall be the length 
 thereof, and a span shall be the breadth 
 thereof. 
 
 17 And thou shalt ‘set in it set- t Heb. ' 
 tings of stones, even four rows of “illings of 
 
 stones: the first row shall be a 'sar- (Gr yay, 
 
 . ment. 
 
 15 “ And thou shalt make the 
 
 breastplate of judgment with cunning 
 
 * Ancient Gems,’ p. 136. The same word is 
 used in vv. 13, 14, 25, Where it seems to ex- 
 press an ornamental gold button, without 
 a stone. ‘The word ouches is used by Shak- 
 speare, Spenser, and some of their contempo- 
 raries in the general sense of jewels. See 
 Nares’ ‘ Glossary.’ 
 
 12. upon the shoulders of the ephod| i.e. 
 upon the shoulder-pieces of the ephod. 
 See vw, 7. 
 
 upon his tavo shoulders| Cf. Isa. ix. 6, xxii. 
 22. The High-priest had to represent the 
 ‘Twelve Tribes in the presence of Jehovah; and 
 the burden of his office could not be so aptly 
 symbolized anywhere as on his shoulders, the 
 parts of the body fittest for carrying burdens. 
 The figure is familiar enough in all languages. 
 Cf. on v. 29. 
 
 The Breastplate. 
 13—30. (Cf. xxxix. 8—21.) 
 13. ouches] See on v. 11. ‘These were 
 two in number, to suit the chains mentioned 
 in the next verse. Cf. v.25 and xxxix. 18. 
 
 14. two chains of pure gold at the ends ; of 
 areathen work shalt thou make them] Rather, 
 two chains of pure gold shalt thou make 
 of wreathen work, twisted like cords. 
 —They were more like cords of twisted gold 
 wire than chains in the ordinary sense of the 
 word. Such chains have been found in Egyp- 
 tian tombs, and some of these were exhibited 
 in the Paris Exhibition of 1867. 
 
 15. the breastplate of judgment] ‘The 
 meaning of the Hebrew word (choshen) ren- 
 dered breastplate, appears to be simply orna- 
 ‘The names given to it in nearly all 
 versions must therefore be regarded as glosses. 
 The LXX., Philo, Josephus and the son of 
 Sirach (Ecclus. xlv. 10) call it Xoyeiov, or 
 Adytov, and the Vulgate rationale, in reference 
 to its use as an oracle in making known the 
 judgments of the Lord. It was from this use 
 that it was designated the Choshen of Sfudg- 
 ment. Symmachus renders the word as a re- 
 
 muoie. 1. 
 
 dius, a topaz, and a carbuncle: this 
 shall be the first row. 
 
 ceptacle, or bag (doyrov), from what appears 
 to have been its form. ‘The names given to it 
 by most modern translators (like our own 
 breastplate) relate merely to its place in the 
 dress. It was to be made of a piece of cun- 
 ning work (the work of the skilled 
 Weaver, see xxxv. 35), the same in texture 
 and materials as the Ephod. ‘This piece was 
 a cubit (two spans) in length and half a cubit 
 (a span) in width, and it was to be folded to- 
 gether so as to form a square of half a cubit. 
 Whether it was doubled with no other pur- 
 pose than to give it stability (Rosenmiiller, 
 Knobel, Kalisch), or in order to form what 
 was used as a bag (Gesenius, Bahr, Fiirst), 
 has been questioned: but the latter appears 
 to be by far the more likely alternative. On 
 the mode in which it was attached to the 
 Ephod, see v. 22 sq., and on its probable use 
 as a bag, see Note at the end of the Chapter. 
 
 17. settings] ‘The same Hebrew word is 
 less aptly rendered ‘inclosings” in «v. 20. 
 From xxxix. 13 it appears that they were 
 ouches of cloisonnée work, like those mentioned 
 in v. 11 as the settings of the gems on the 
 shoulder-pieces of the ephod. 
 
 four rows of stones] No very near approach 
 to certainty can be obtained in the identifica- 
 tion of these precious stones. In several in- 
 stances the Hebrew names themselves afford 
 some light on the subject. ‘The oldest ex- 
 ternal authority to help us is the LX X., and 
 next to it come Josephus (‘ Ant.’ II. 7. § 55 
 ‘Bel. Jud.’v. 5. § 7) and the other old versions, 
 especially the Vulgate. It must however be 
 observed that the Greek and Latin names are 
 not always consistently applied to the same 
 Hebrew word in different places (see on v. 9). 
 One point of interest in the inquiry appears to 
 be the etymological identity of several of the 
 names of stones in Hebrew, Greek, Latin and 
 the modern languages of Europe. ‘These 
 names were probably transmitted to the Greeks 
 and Romans by the Phoenician merchants, 
 whose traffic in most of the precious stones 
 
 BB 
 
4 
 
 od 
 
 86 
 
 its hardness. 
 
 18 And the second row shall be an 
 emerald, a sapphire, and a diamond. 
 
 here mentioned is alluded to by Ezekiel (xxviil. 
 13). But, unfortunately, the identity of the 
 stone denoted by no means follows from the 
 identity of the name. A name was often given 
 in-ancient times to a substance on account of 
 some single characteristic, such as its colour or 
 Hence adamant was applied to 
 the diamond, to steel, and to other hard bo- 
 dies: sapphire was certainly applied to the 
 lapis-lazuli, and, though not till a much later 
 age, to what we call the sapphire. Hence 
 it is plain that our conclusions on the sub- 
 ject can rarely be quite certain. ‘The field of 
 conjecture in the present inquiry may however 
 be somewhat narrowed from the results of the 
 study of the antique gems of Assyria, Egypt 
 and Ancient Greece. We need not hesitate to 
 exclude those stones which appear to have been 
 unknown to the ancients, and those which 
 are so hard that the ancients did not know 
 how to engrave them. On such grounds, 
 according to Prof. Maskelyne, we must at 
 once reject the diamond, the ruby, the sap- 
 phire, the emerald, the topaz, and the chry- 
 soberyl.—The best information on the subject 
 may be found in two articles in the ‘ Edinb. 
 Rev.” Nos. 253, 254, by Prof. Maskelyne, to 
 whom these notes on the breastplate are 
 greatly indebted. 
 
 a sardius| Heb. odem, i.e. the red stone; 
 LXX. capdiov; Vulg. sardius; Jos. capdovvé 
 in one place (‘ Ant.’ 111. 7. § 5), but cdpdroy 
 in another (‘ Bel. Jud.’ v. 5. § 7). The Sar- 
 dian stone, or sard, was much used by the 
 ancients for seals; and it is perhaps the stone 
 of all others the best for engraving (see Theo- 
 phrastus, ‘de Lapid.’ 8; Pliny, ‘H.N.’xxxvil, 
 23, 31). It is mentioned Ezek. xxvii. 13. 
 
 topaz| Heb. pitdah; LXX. and Jos. ro- 
 matiov; Vulg. topazius. ‘The word topaz ap- 
 pears to have been formed by metathesis from 
 pitdah (Gesenius, Knobel, Fiirst). ‘The pitdah 
 is mentioned by Ezekiel (xxviil. 13); and it 
 is spoken of in Job (xxviii. 19) as a product of 
 Ethiopia, which tends to confirm its identity 
 with the topaz which is said by Strabo (xv. 
 p- 770), Diodorus (II. 39), and Pliny (xxxvni. 
 32), to have been obtained from Ethiopia. It 
 was not however the stone now called the 
 topaz: it may have been the peridot, or 
 chrysolite, a stone of a greenish hue. 
 
 a carbuncle| Heb. bareketh; LXX. and 
 Jos. opapaydos, Vulg. smaragdus. It was cer- 
 tainly not the carbuncle; it is not improbable 
 that it was the beryl, which is a kind of 
 emerald (Plin. xxxvil. 16, Solinus xV. 23). 
 The Greek name sometimes appears as papay- 
 dos, supposed to be identical with the Sanskrit 
 name of the beryl, marakata (Fiirst), which 
 plainly appears to be allied to the Heb. dareketh, 
 
 EXODUS, XXVIII 
 
 [v. 18, 19. 
 
 1g And the third row a ligure, an 
 agate, and an amethyst. 
 
 and probably to our own emerald. Gesenius 
 and Liddell and Scott severally ascribe the 
 Hebrew name and the Greek to roots signify- 
 ing to glitter, or sparkle: but the character- 
 istic quality thus suggested is not one that 
 particularly distinguishes the beryl amongst 
 precious stones. ‘The bareketh is mentioned 
 Iezek. Xxviil. 13. 
 
 18. anemerald| Heb. nophek, i.e. the glow- 
 ing stone (Knobel, First); LXX. and Jos. 
 avOpa&; Vulg. carbunculus. ‘There seems no 
 reason to doubt that the garnet, which when 
 cut with a convex face is termed the car- 
 buncle, is meant. (See Theoph. ‘de Lapid.’ 
 18). The same stone is mentioned Ezek, 
 XXVll, 16, XXVili. 13. 
 
 a sapphire| Heb. sappir; LXX. cardet- 
 pos; Vulg. sapphirus. Josephus appears to 
 have transposed this name and the next, and 
 may fairly be regarded as agreeing with the 
 LXX. as to its meaning. It is conceived 
 to have been the sapphire of the Greeks, not 
 only from the identity of the name, but from 
 the evident references to the colour in Exod. 
 XxIv. 10; Ezek. i. 26, x. 1. The name also 
 occurs Job xxvill. 6, 16; Cant. v. 14; Isa. 
 liv. rr; Lam. iv. 7; Ezek. xxviii. 13. Mi- 
 chaelis and others objected to what is now 
 called the sapphire on account of its hard- 
 ness, and supposed that the lapis-lazuli is 
 most probably meant. ‘The best recent autho- 
 rities justify this conjecture, in reference not 
 only to the sappir of the Old ‘Testament, but 
 to the sapphire of the Greeks and Romans 
 (see the first note on this verse). According 
 to a Jewish fancy in the Talmud, the Tables 
 of the Law were formed of sappir. 
 
 a diamond| Heb. yahalom. ‘The etymology 
 of the word is supposed to be similar to that 
 ascribed to the Greek dSdyuas, so as to give it 
 the meaning of the unconquerable. Hence 
 some of the ancient versions, with Aben-Ezra, 
 Abarbanel, and Luther (whom our translators 
 followed), have taken the diamond as the 
 stone denoted. But there is no trace of evi- 
 dence that the ancients ever acquired the skill 
 to engrave on the diamond, or even that they 
 Were acquainted with the stone. 
 render yahalom by taoms, and the Vulg. by 
 
 Jaspis; but these words answer more satis- 
 
 factorily to the jasper (see on v. 20). Some 
 
 imagine it to be the onyx, which is more. 
 
 likely the shoham (v. 9): but it may pos- 
 
 sibly be some other variety of chalcedony, or’ 
 
 (perhaps) rock crystal. In the uncertainty 
 which exists, the original name yahalom 
 might be retained in the version. ‘The word 
 is found in Ezek. xxvili. 13: but it is another 
 word (shamir) which is rendered diamond or 
 
 adamant in Jer. xvil.1; Ezek. iii. 9 ; Zech, vii.12,. 
 
 ‘The LXX,: 
 
+ Heb. 
 fillings. 
 
 v. 20—27.| 
 
 20 And the fourth row a beryl, and 
 an onyx, and a jasper: they shall be 
 set in gold in their ' inclosings. 
 
 21 And the stones shall be with 
 the names of the children of Israel, 
 twelve, according to their names, ke 
 the engravings of a signet; every one 
 with his name shall they be according 
 to the twelve tribes. 
 
 22, § And thou shalt make upon 
 the breastplate chains at the ends of 
 wreathen work of pure gold. 
 
 23 And thou shalt make upon the 
 breastplate two rings of gold, and 
 shalt put the two rings on the two 
 ends of the breastplate. 
 
 24 And thou shalt put the 
 wreathen chains of gold in the 
 
 two 
 two 
 
 19. aligure| Heb. leshem, LXX. and Jos. 
 Arytptov, Vulg. ligurius. According to ‘Theo- 
 phrastus (‘de Lapid.’ 29) and Pliny (‘H. N.’ 
 XXXVII. 11), amber came from Liguria, and 
 this would exactly account for the names used 
 by the LXX. and Vulg., if, as is not in any 
 respect improbable, amber is here meant. On 
 the name AvyKovpiov, see Liddell and Scott. 
 The /eshem is not mentioned elsewhere in the 
 Old Testament except in xxxix. 12. 
 
 an agate| Heb. shevoo, LXX. dyarns, 
 Vulg. achates. Josephus appears to have 
 transposed dyarns with the next name: he 
 makes several other changes in the order of 
 the stones in the list given, ‘Bel. Jud.’ v. 5. 
 § 7. No question has been raised that the 
 agate is here meant. ‘The word shevoe occurs 
 only here and xxxix. 12; but another word 
 (kadkod) is rendered agate in our version, Isa, 
 hiv. 12; Ezek. xxvii. 16. 
 
 an amethyst} Heb. achlamah, XX. and 
 Josephus dpéedvaros, Vulg. amethystus. Men- 
 tioned only here and xxxix. 12. 
 
 20. a beryl] Heb. tarshish, LXX. and 
 Jos. ypuvaddibos, Vulg. chrysolithus. This 
 could hardly have been the beryl (see on v. 17) 
 or the turkois, as Luther and Cranmer im- 
 agined. ‘The Hebrew name is reasonably sup- 
 posed to have been given to the stone because 
 it came from Tarshish. A kind of carbuncle, 
 or garnet, is spoken of by Pliny, called carche- 
 donius, in connection with Carthage (‘ H. N.’ 
 XXXVII. 25), and this is supposed by some 
 to be the tarshish (Knobel, Fiirst). Others 
 suppose that it was what Pliny calls the chry- 
 solite, a brilliant yellow stone (see Plin. 
 XXXVIJ. 42), which they identity with what 
 is now known as the Spanish topaz (Gese- 
 nius, &c.). It would seem to be best, in 
 such uncertainty, to retain the name tarshish 
 
 PeS Oi US, 2X V PFI, 
 
 a 
 
 od 
 
 rings which are on the ends of the 
 breastplate. 
 
 25 And the other two ends of the 
 two wreathen chains thou shalt fasten 
 in the two ouches, and put them on the 
 shoulderpieces of the ephod before it. 
 
 26 4 And thou shalt make two 
 rings of gold, and thou shalt put them 
 upon the two ends of the breastplate 
 in the border thereof, which zs in the 
 side of the ephod inward. 
 
 27 And two other rings of gold 
 thou shalt make, and shalt put them 
 on the two sides of the ephod under- 
 neath, toward the forepart thereof, 
 over against the other coupling there- 
 of, above the curious girdle of the 
 ephod. 
 
 in translating. ‘The stone is mentioned Cant. 
 Vv. 143) Ezek, 17 16, «X..9; Sxvillrg5, Dam 
 x. 6. 
 
 an onyx] Heb. shoham. Josephus and the 
 Vulgate take it for the onyx (see on v. 9); but 
 the LX X., apparently by a copyist’s transpo- 
 sition, have BnpvAdov here, and dviyoy for 
 the next stone. The shoham is mentioned 
 Gen. ii. 12; Ex. xxv. 7; 1 Chro. xxix. 2; Job 
 XXVili. 16; Ezek. xxvill. 13. 
 
 a jasper| Heb. yashpeb. ‘The similarity of 
 the Hebrew name to our word jasper, to the 
 Greek faoms, the Latin jaspis, and the Arabic 
 jash, is obvious. Jcsephus and the Vulgate 
 render it as Jery/, and the LXX. as onyx (but 
 see preceding note). The best authorities 
 take it for jasper (Gesen., Bahr, Knobel, 
 Fiirst): it was probably the green jasper. It 
 is mentioned nowhere else except Ex. xxxix. 
 133 Ezek. xxviii. 13. 
 
 their inclosings| their settings (see on 
 v. 17). 
 
 22. chains at the ends of wreathen work] 
 chains of wreathen work, twisted like 
 cords (see on v. 14). 
 
 23. on the two ends of the breastplate] 
 The extremities spoken of here, and in the 
 next verse, must have been the upper corners 
 of the square. The chains attached to them 
 (wv. 25) suspended the Breastplate from the 
 ouches of the shoulder-pieces (wv. 9, II, 12). 
 
 26. two rings] ‘These two rings appear 
 to have been fastened to the Breastplate, near 
 its lower corners upon the inner side, so as 
 to have been out of sight. See on the follow- 
 ing two verses. 
 
 27. ‘And two rings of gold shalt thou 
 make and put them on the two shoulder- 
 pieces of the Ephod, low down in the 
 
 BB2 
 
 87 
 
388 
 
 28 And they shall bind the breast- 
 plate by the rings thereof unto the 
 rings of the ephod with a lace of 
 blue, that zt may be above the curious 
 girdle of the ephod, and that the 
 breastplate be not loosed from the 
 ephod, 
 
 29 And Aaron shall bear the 
 names of the children of Israel in the 
 breastplate of judgment upon his heart, 
 when he goeth in unto the holy place, 
 for a memorial before the Lorp con- 
 tinually. 
 
 30 @ And thou shalt put in the 
 breastplate of judgment the Urim and 
 the Thummim; and they shall be 
 
 front of it, near the joining, above 
 the band for fastening it.” It would 
 seem that the shoulder-pieces were continued 
 down the front of the Ephod as far as the 
 band (see on v. 8); the joining appears to 
 have been the meeting of the extremities of 
 the shoulder-pieces with the band. ‘These 
 rings were attached to the shoulder-pieces 
 just above this joining. 
 
 28. the curious girdle of the ephod| the 
 band for fastening it (see onv. 8). The 
 two lower rings of the Breastplate were to be 
 tied to the rings near the ends of the shoulder- 
 pieces, opposite to which they seem to, have 
 been placed, by laces of blue, so as to keep the 
 pees firmly in its place just above the 
 
 and. 
 
 29. The names of the Tribes on the two 
 onyx stones were worn on the shoulders of 
 the High-priest to indicate the burden of 
 the office which he bore (see on v. 12); the 
 same names engraved on the stones of the 
 Breastplate were worn over his heart, the seat 
 of the affections, as well as of the intellect 
 (see on v. 3), to symbolize the relation of 
 love and of personal interest which the Lord 
 requires to exist between the Priest and the 
 People. 
 
 30. put in the breastplate of judgment the 
 Urim and the Thummim] It is not questioned 
 that this rendering (which agrees with the 
 Vulgate, Saadia, Luther, and most modern 
 versions) fairly represents the original words; 
 and it most naturally follows that the Urim 
 and the —Thummim (whatever they were) 
 were put into the bag that was formed by the 
 doubling of the Choshen (see on v. 15), as the 
 Tables of the Law were put into the Ark, the 
 same verb and preposition being used in each 
 case (xxv. 16). Most critics are in favour of 
 this view. But it cannot be denied that the 
 words may also mean, upon the Breastplate. 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 x XKV I Ie [v. 28—33. - 
 upon Aaron’s heart, when he goeth 
 in before the Lorp: and Aaron shall 
 bear the judgment of the children of 
 Israel.upon his heart before the Lorp 
 continually. 
 
 31 4 And thou shalt make the 
 robe of the ephod all of blue. 
 
 32 And there shall be an hole in 
 the top of it, in the midst thereof: 
 it shall have a binding of woven work 
 
 ‘round about the hole of it, as it were 
 
 the hole of an habergeon, that it be 
 not rent. 
 
 33 @ And beneath upon the ! hem '0 
 
 skirts. 
 
 of it thou shalt make pomegranates 
 
 of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet, 
 
 So the LXX., the Syriac, de Wette, Knobel. 
 See Note at the end of the Chapter. 
 
 the Urim and the Thummim] ‘These were 
 probably some well-known means for casting 
 lots which, from this time forward, were kept 
 in the bag of the Choshen. See Note. 
 
 The Robe of the Ephod. 
 3I1—35. (XXxix. 22—26.) 
 
 81. the robe of the ephod| ‘The Robe of 
 the Ephod was a frock or robe of the simplest 
 form, woven without seam, wholly of blue 
 (see Note at the end of ch. xxv. §II.). It 
 was put on by being drawn over the head. 
 It appears to have had no sleeves. It pro- 
 bably reached a little below the knees. It must 
 have been visible above and below the Ephod, 
 the variegated texture of which it must have 
 set off as a plain blue groundwork. 
 
 32. And there shall be an hole in the top of it, 
 in the midst thereof| And its opening for 
 the head shall be in the middle of it. 
 So de Wette, Knobel, Kalisch, Herx., &c. 
 ‘The meaning appears to be that the opening 
 through which the head was to be put should 
 be a mere round hole, not connected with any 
 longitudinal slit before or behind. 
 
 of woven work] of the work of the 
 Weaver (see On Xxvi, I, xxxv. 35). ‘This 
 was probably a stout binding of woven thread, 
 sewn over the edge of the hole for the head, 
 to strengthen it and preserve it from fraying. 
 
 an habergeon| ‘The original word, tacharah, 
 is found in Egyptian papyri of the 19th dy- 
 nasty (Brugsch, ‘ D. H.,’ p. 1579), though its 
 root appears to be Semitic (Gesen, ‘ Thes,’ 
 p. 518). Corselets of linen, such as appear to 
 be here referred to, were well known amongst 
 the Egyptians (Herodot. 11. 182, 111. 47; Plin, 
 xIx. 2, Cf. Hom, ‘IL’ 11.°529)3 
 
 33, 34. The skirt was to be adorned with 
 a border of pomegranates in colours, and a 
 
 ——— 
 
6 Ecclus. 
 
 45- 9- 
 
 V. 34——-39-] 
 
 round about the hem thereof; and bells 
 of gold between them round about: 
 
 34 A golden bell and a pome- 
 granate, a golden bell and a pome- 
 granate, upon the hem of the robe 
 round about. 
 
 35 ’ And it shall be upon Aaron to 
 minister : and his sound shall be heard 
 when he goeth in unto the holy place 
 before the Lorp, and when he com- 
 eth out, that he die not. 
 
 36 4 And thou shalt make a plate 
 of pure gold, and grave upon it, /ke 
 the engravings of a signet, HOLI- 
 NESS TO THE LORD. 
 
 small golden bell was to be attached to the 
 hem between each two of the pomegranates, 
 
 35. his sound| its sound, i.e. the sound 
 of the Robe. Some conceive that the bells 
 furnished a musical offering of praise to the 
 Lord (Knobel, &c.), But it seems more 
 likely that their purpose was that the people, 
 who stood without, when they heard the 
 sound of them within the Tabernacle, might 
 have a sensible proof that the High-priest was 
 performing the sacred rite in their behalf, 
 though he was out of their sight. ‘The bells 
 thus became an incentive to devotional feel- 
 ings. ‘This accords with very early tradition. 
 See Ecclus. xlv, 9. 
 
 ' that he die not} ‘The bells also bore witness 
 that the High-priest was, at the time of his 
 ministration, duly attired in the dress of his 
 Office, and so was not incurring the sentence 
 of death which is referred to again in v, 43 in 
 connection with the linen drawers that were 
 worn by the whole body of the priests. An 
 infraction of the laws for the service of the 
 Sanctuary was not merely an act of disobe- 
 dience; it was a direct insult to the presence 
 of Jehovah from His ordained minister, and 
 justly incurred a sentence of capital punish- 
 Prete XXX. 21s Lev. vill. 35, x. 7. 
 
 The Mitre and the Garments of Fine Linen. 
 
 36—43. (XXxixX, 27—3I.) 
 _ 36. In the narrative of the making of the 
 holy things (xxxix, 28, 30) the Mitre of fine 
 linen is mentioned before the Golden Plate, as 
 having been first completed, and as that to 
 which the plate itself was to be attached. 
 But in these directions the plate is first de- 
 scribed, as being the most significant part of 
 the head-dress. For a similar transposition, 
 shewing the strictly practical character of the 
 narrative, see ON XxXxvVv. IT, 
 
 engravings of a signet] See on v, II. 
 
 EXODUS, XXVIII. 
 
 37 And thou shalt put it on a 
 blue lace, that it may be upon the 
 
 mitre; upon the forefront of the mitre 
 it shall be. 
 
 38 And it shall be upon Aaron’s 
 forehead, that Aaron may bear the 
 iniquity of the holy things, which 
 the children of Israel shall hallow in 
 all their holy gifts; and it shall be 
 always upon his forehead, that they 
 may be accepted before the Lorn. 
 
 39 § And thou shalt embroider 
 the coat of fine linen, and thou shalt 
 make the mitre of fine linen, and thou 
 shalt make the girdle of needlework. 
 
 HOLINESS TO THE LORD] _ This 
 inscription testified in express words the holi- 
 ness with.which the High-priest was invested 
 in virtue of his sacred calling. 
 
 37. a blue lace] ‘The plate was fastened 
 upon a blue band or fillet, so tied round the 
 mitre as to shew the plate in front. 
 
 the mitre] According to the derivation of 
 the Hebrew word, and from the statement in 
 v, 39, this was a twisted band of linen coiled 
 into a cap, to which the name mitre, in its 
 original sense, closely answers, but which, in 
 modern usage, would rather be called a turban, 
 
 38. bear the iniquity of the holy things] 
 The Hebrew expression ‘‘to bear iniquity” 
 is applied either to one who suffers the 
 penalty of sin (wv. 43; Lev. v. 1, 17, Xvil. 16, 
 xxvi, 41, &c.), or to one who takes away the 
 sin of others (Gen. 1], 17; Lev. x. 17, xvi. 22; 
 Num, xxx. 15; 1 S, xv. 25, &c. See on Gen, 
 iv. 13). In several of these passages the verb 
 is rightly rendered to forgive.—The iniquity 
 which is spoken of in this place does not 
 mean particular sins actually committed, but 
 that condition. of alienation from God in 
 every earthly thing which makes reconcilia- 
 tion and consecration needful. Cf. Num. 
 xviii. 1. It belonged to the High-priest, as 
 the chief atoning mediator between Jehovah 
 and His people (see on v. 36), to atone for 
 the holy things that they might be ‘‘ accepted 
 before the Lord” (cf. Lev. viii. 15, Xvi. 20, 
 33, with the notes): but the common priests 
 also, in their proper functions, had to take 
 their part in making atonement (Lev. Iv. 20, 
 Vv. 10, X. 17, xxii, 16; Num, xviil. 23, &cx), 
 
 39. embroider the coat of fine linen] ‘This 
 garment appears to have been a long tunic, or 
 cassock. Josephus says that it was worn 
 next the skin, that it reached to the feet, and 
 that it had closely fitting sleeves (‘ Ant.’ III. 7. 
 § 2). The verb translated embroider (shabatz, 
 a word of very rare occurrence) appears ra- 
 
 89 
 
390 
 
 40 4 And for Aaron’s sons thou 
 shalt make coats, and thou shalt make 
 for them girdles, and bonnets shalt 
 thou make for them, for glory and for 
 beauty. 
 
 41 And thou shalt put them upon 
 Aaron thy brother, and his sons with 
 him; and shalt anoint them, and 
 ‘consecrate them, and sanctify them, 
 that they may minister unto me in 
 the priest’s office. 
 
 42 And thou shalt make them 
 
 ther to mean weave in diaper work. ‘The 
 tissue consisted of threads of one and the same 
 colour diapered in checkers, or in some small 
 figure. According to xxxix. 27 such tissue 
 was woven by the ordinary weaver, not by 
 the skilled weaver. (See on xxxv. 35; Ge- 
 sen, "Pires. 1 350% First, * Lex. sy) Cr 
 Wilkinson, ‘Pop. Account,’ Vol. 1. p. 86.) 
 It has been inferred from vw. 40, 41, and from 
 XXxIX. 27, that this and the other linen gar- 
 ments of the High-priest, with the exception 
 of the mitre, did not differ from the dress of 
 the common priests mentioned in the next 
 verse, See Lev. vi. 10; Ezek. xliv. 17. 
 
 the mitre of fine linen] See on v. 37. 
 
 the girdle of needlework| the girdle of 
 the work of the embroiderer (xxvi. 1, 
 xxxv. 35). ‘The word translated girdle is a 
 different one from that so rendered in v. 8 
 (see note). ‘The name here used (aduet) has 
 been supposed to be a Persian word (Gesenius), 
 but it is more likely to be an Egyptian one 
 (First, Brugsch, Birch). It was embroider- 
 ed in three colours (xxxix. 29). Josephus 
 says that its texture was very loose, so that it 
 resembled the slough of a snake, that it was 
 wound several times round the body, and that 
 its ends ordinarily hung down to the feet, but 
 were thrown over the shoulder when the 
 priest was engaged in his work, 
 
 40. Aaron's sons| ‘The common priests 
 are here meant. See on v. 4. The girdle 
 worn by them is here called by the same 
 name as that of the High-priest (abner), and 
 was probably of the same make. Cf. xxxix. 
 29. Instead of the mitre consisting of a coil 
 of twisted linen, the common priests wore 
 caps of a simple construction which, accord- 
 ing to a probable explanation of the name, 
 
 ERODES, 
 
 K RVs [v. 40—43. 
 
 linen breeches to cover t their naked- + Heb. 
 
 ; esh } 
 ness; from the loins even unto the their” 
 thighs they shall ' reach: Mere 
 
 43 And they shall be upon Aaron, 
 and upon his sons, when they come 
 in unto the tabernacle of the con- 
 gregation, or when they come near 
 unto the altar to minister in the 
 holy place; that they bear not ini- 
 quity, and die: zt shall be a statute 
 for ever unto him and his seed after 
 him. 
 
 i ee ee ee es 
 
 seem to have been cup-shaped. ‘They were 
 however of fine texture and workmanship 
 (xxxix. 28). The word Sonnet is, in our 
 present English, less suitable than cap. ‘The 
 description of the head-dress of the priests 
 given by Josephus (‘ Ant.’ ILI. 3. § 6) perhaps 
 indicates a change of form in his day. Cf. 
 on v. 7. 
 
 for glory and for beauty| See v, 2 and the 
 following note, 
 
 41—483. ‘The dress of white linen was the 
 strictly sacerdotal dress common to the whole 
 body of priests (Ezek, xliv. 17, 18), These 
 were ‘“‘for glory and for beauty” not less than 
 the golden garments (as they were called by 
 the Jews) which formed the High-priest’s dress 
 of state (v. 2). The linen suit which the 
 High-priest put on when he went into the 
 Most Holy place on the Day of Atonement, 
 appears to have been regarded with peculiar 
 respect (Lev, xvi. 4, 23; cf. Exod. xxxi. Io), 
 though it is nowhere stated that it was dis- 
 tinguished in its make or texture, except in 
 having a girdle (abnet) wholly of white linen, 
 instead of a variegated one.—It may here be 
 observed that the statement in Josephus, that 
 the High-priest wore his golden garments only 
 when he went into the Most Holy place 
 (‘Bel. Jud.’ v. 5. § 7) is an obvious mistake : 
 the reading is probably corrupt (see Hudson’s 
 note).—The ancient Egyptian priests, like the 
 Hebrew priests, wore nothing but white linen 
 garments in the performance of their duties 
 (Herod. If. 37, with Wilkinson’s note; Hengst. 
 ‘Egypt and the Books of Moses,’ p. 145). 
 
 43. in unto the tabernacle] into the 
 Tent. See on xxvi. I. 
 
 that they bear not iniquity, and die] See 
 On VU, 35, 38. 
 
 NOTE on Cuap, XXVIII. 30, 
 
 ON THE URIM AND THE THUMMIM. 
 
 I. Their names. Il. They were previously known, 
 and distinct from the Breastplate. 111, 
 Their purpose and history. INV. Their 
 origin. V. Theories, 
 
 I; 
 
 The expression the Urim and the Thummim 
 (DX.AINS) DMAXINS) appears to mean 
 the Light and the Truth. ‘The primary meaning 
 of the latter term is perfection. ‘The form 
 
eS OV BN ORY 
 
 of the words is plural; but, according to the 
 Hebrew idiom, this does not necessarily imply 
 a plural sense. The rendering of the LXX. 
 is, 7 SyAwots Kai y adnOeva; that of Symma- 
 chus, @wricpot cai Tedevorntes; that of the 
 Vulgate, Doctrina et Veritas. ‘The other 
 ancient versions substantially agree with one 
 or other of these. In most modern versions, 
 except Luther’s (Licht und Recht) and de 
 Wette’s (das Licht und die Wahrheit), the 
 words are untranslated. 
 
 II. 
 
 From the way in which they are spoken of 
 in Ex. xxviii. 30 and in Lev. viii. 8, compared 
 with Ex, xxviii. 15 —21, it would appear, tak- 
 ing a simple view of the words, that the Urim 
 and the Thummim were some material things, 
 and that they were separate from the Breast- 
 plate itself, as well as from the gems that 
 were set upon it. It would seem most pro- 
 bable that they were kept in the bag of the 
 Breastplate (Ex. xxvill. 16). And from the 
 definite article being prefixed to each of ‘the 
 names, from their not being described in any 
 way, and from their not being mentioned in 
 the record of the construction of the Breast- 
 plate (xxxix. 21), it seems most likely that 
 they were something previously existing and 
 familiarly known. It is true that the Samari- 
 tan text says that Moses was to make them: 
 but even if we accept this very weak authority, 
 when the statement is compared with the fact 
 that there is no direction given as to form or 
 material, it leaves us to infer that they were 
 no novelty as regards their use. 
 
 ut: 
 
 The purpose of the Urim and the Thum- 
 mim is clearly enough indicated in Num. 
 XXviil. 21; 1 S. xxviii. 6; and also (as they 
 were evidently regarded as belonging to the 
 Ephod) in x S. xxiii. g—12, xxx. 7, 8, cf. 
 xxii. 14, 15. We are warranted in conclud- 
 ing that they were visible things of some sort 
 by which the will of Jehovah, especially in 
 what related to the wars in which His people 
 were engaged, was made known, and that 
 from this time they were preserved in the bag 
 of the Breastplate of the High-priest, to be 
 borne ‘‘upon his heart before the LorD con- 
 tinually” (Ex. xxviii. 30). They were form- 
 ally delivered by Moses to Aaron (Lev. viii. 8), 
 and subsequently passed on to Eleazar (Num. 
 xx. 28, xxvii. 21). They were esteemed as the 
 crowning glory of the Tribe of Levi (Deut. 
  xxxiii. 8). ‘There is no instance on record of 
 their being consulted after the time of David, 
 They were certainly not in use after the Cap- 
 tivity; and it seems to haye become a proverb 
 in reference to a question of inextricable dif_i- 
 culty, that it should not be solved ‘till there 
 stood up a priest with Urim and Thummim” 
 (Ezra ii. 63; Neh. vii. 65; cf. Hos. iil. 4).— 
 Such seem to be all the particulars that can be 
 
 eo Vee l, 
 
 gathered immediately, or by éasy inference, 
 from Holy Scripture, regarding the nature, 
 purpose, and history of the Urim and the 
 Thummim, 
 
 IV. 
 
 Since the time of Spencer, the opinion has 
 prevailed to a great extent that the Urim and 
 the Thummim were wholly, or in part. of 
 Egyptian origin. With this opinion is con- 
 nected the notion that they were two small 
 images of precious stone, which appears to 
 have taken its rise from a passage in Philo; 
 TO 5€ Noyeiov rerpayavoy Simdodv KaTecKeva- 
 Cero, woavet Baors, iva S00 apetas ayadpato- 
 hopn, SnAwoiv te kai adnOecay (‘ Vit. Mos.’ 
 Ill. rr). But may not the symbol of the two 
 virtues in the fancy of Philo have been rather 
 the two sides of the Choshen than two actual 
 images? Philo’s use ofthe verb dya\parodo- 
 peiy in other connections may tend to confirm 
 this view. See ‘de Confus, Ling.’ c. 13; ‘de 
 Mundi Opif.’ c. 23; but still more to the 
 point is a passage in which he says that the 
 two webs of the Choshen were called Revela- 
 tion and Truth—¥mi 5€ rov doyetov ditra 
 vpaopara KararrotkiANet, TpoTayapEevov TO pev 
 dSnAwow TO dé addnOevay (‘de Monarch.’ Il. 5, 
 See also ‘ Legis Alleg.’ 111. 40, where he sub- 
 stitutes cadnveca for dyAwors). But it is al- 
 leged that a close analogy is furnished by the 
 image of sapphire (/apis Jazuli, see on Ex. 
 XXvilil. 18) called Truth, that was suspended 
 by a gold chain on the breasts of the Egyptian 
 Judges, with which they touched the lips of 
 acquitted persons (Diod. Sic, I. 48, 75; Alian, 
 ‘Var. Hist.’ x1v. 34). That such a custom as 
 this was of old standing in Egypt, is rendered 
 very probable by certain pictures of great an- 
 tiquity in which the image is represented as a 
 double one, bearing the symbols of Truth and 
 Fustice. ‘The deity endowed with this dual 
 character was called Thmei, and with this name 
 some have connected the word Thummim, 
 (Wilkinson, Il. p. 205). But this etymology 
 is entirely rejected by Egyptian scholars.—The 
 Egyptian origin of the Urim and the Thum- 
 mim has been advocated by Spencer, Gesenius, 
 Knobel, Fiirst, Hengstenberg, Plumptre (in 
 Smith’s ‘ Dict.’ s, v.) and others. 
 
 But an argument on the other side seems to 
 be furnished by the connection of the Tera- 
 phim with the Urim and the Thummin, 
 which may be traced in the Old Testament, 
 It has been suggested on very probable ground 
 that the Teraphim may have been employed 
 as an unauthorized substitute for the Urim 
 and the Thummim!. Now we know that 
 the Teraphim belonged to patriarchal times, 
 
 1 See Judg. xvii. 5, xviii. 14, 17, 203 Hos. 
 iii, 4; and} as rightly rendered in the margin, 
 2 K. xxiii. 24; Ezek. xxi. 21; Zech. x. 2: to 
 these may be added, as it stands in the Hebrew, 
 
 Pow XVs 2 3s 
 
 391 
 
392 
 
 to the Semitic race, and to regions remote 
 from Egypt (see Gen. xxxi. 19, &c.). Is not 
 the supposition as easy that the Urim and the 
 Thummim took the place of what must have 
 been familiarly known to the Patriarchs, and 
 which appear, in a renewal of the old degraded 
 form, to have been in later times confounded 
 with them, as that they were adopted from 
 the Egyptians? 
 
 V. 
 
 As to the form and material of the Urim 
 and the Thummim, and as to the mode in 
 which they were consulted by the High- 
 priest, there have been many conjectures, 
 some of them very wild and startling. It 
 would be out of place here to go at length 
 into a subject in which there is so little to 
 limit or to regulate the field of conjecture, 
 that anything like certainty is beyond the 
 reach of hope; but the inquiry must not be 
 entirely passed over. We may first observe 
 that the different views which have been taken 
 are based on three distinct theories :— 
 
 1. That the Divine Will was manifested 
 through the Urim and the Thummim by some 
 physical effect addressed to the eye or the ear. 
 
 2. ‘That they were some ordained symbol 
 which, when the High-priest concentrated his 
 sight and attention on it, became a means of 
 calling forth the prophetic gift. 
 
 3. That they were some contrivance for 
 casting lots. 
 
 1. Josephus, who identified the stones of 
 the Breastplate with the Urim and the Thum- 
 mim, says that they signified a favourable 
 answer to the question proposed by shining 
 forth with unusual brilliancy. He adds that 
 they had not been known to exhibit this power 
 for 200 years before his time (‘ Ant.’ 111.8. §9). 
 As regards the mode of the answer, several 
 Jewish, and many Christian, writers, have 
 followed him. ‘The rabbinists adopted the 
 notion, and shewed their usual tendency by 
 exaggerating it. ‘They said that the answer 
 was communicated in detail by particular 
 letters in the inscriptions on the stones shining 
 out in succession, so as to spell the words}. 
 —Spencer, supposing that the Urim and the 
 Thummim were two images, or Teraphim, 
 imagined that an angel was commissioned to 
 speak through the lips of one of them with 
 an audible voice (‘de Leg. Hebr.’ lib. 111. c. v. 
 § 3). Prideaux and others have supposed that 
 an audible voice addressed itself from the 
 Mercy-seat as the High-priest stood before it 
 wearing the Breastplate on his breast (‘ Con- 
 nection,’ &c., book I.). 
 
 1 See Sheringham’s note on Yoma, in Suren- 
 husius, Vol. 11. p. 251, and the notes of Drusius 
 and Cartwright on Ex. xxviii, 30 in the ‘Crit, 
 Sac,’ | 
 
 EXODUS, XXVIIT. 
 
 2. Some of those who have held the second 
 theory have conceived that the High-priest 
 used to fix his eyes on the gems of the Breast 
 plate until the spirit of Prophecy came upon 
 him and gave him utterance. Others have con- 
 jectured that the object of his contemplation 
 was not the gems themselves, but some dis- 
 tinct object with sacred associations, such as 
 a gold plate or gem of some kind inscribed 
 with the name JEHOVAH, attached to the 
 outside of the Breastplate. ‘This theory, 
 in some form, is adopted by the ‘Targum of 
 Palestine, Theodoret, Lightfoot, Kalisch and 
 many others; but it is most fully reasoned 
 out by Plumptre in Smith’s ‘ Dictionary,’ 
 
 3. Michaelis, Jahn and others, have sup- 
 posed that the Urim and the Thummim might 
 have been three slips, one with yes upon it, 
 one with zo, and the third plain, and that the 
 slip taken out of the pocket of the Breast- 
 plate at hap-hazard by the High-priest was 
 regarded as giving the answer to the question 
 proposed.—Gesenius and Fiirst have adopted 
 Spencer’s notion, that they were two images, 
 but supposed that they were used in some 
 mode of casting lots— Winer, following Ziil- 
 lig, imagined that the Urim were diamonds cut 
 in the form of dice, and that the Thummim 
 were rough diamonds (according to the mean- 
 ing of the word, entire) with some sort of 
 marks engraved on them, which the High- 
 priest, when he sought tor an answer, took 
 out of the bag and threw down on a table 
 in the Sanctuary, drawing a meaning from 
 the mode in which they fell. 
 
 But the theory itself is not necessarily in- 
 volved in these hollow and vain conjectures as 
 to the material instruments which may have 
 been employed. No attempted explanation 
 seems to be more in accordance with such 
 analogy as the history of the Israelites affords, 
 or more free from objection, than that the 
 Urim and the Thummim were some means 
 of casting lots. ‘That the Lord should have 
 made His will known to His people by such 
 means may indeed run counter to our own 
 habits of thought. But we know that appeals 
 to lots were made under divine authority by 
 the chosen people on the most solemn occa- 
 sions*. The divine will was manifested by 
 circumstances in themselves of as little note, 
 or of as little external connection with the 
 question at issue, as the dampness or the dry- 
 ness of a fleece laid on the ground (Judg. 
 vi. 36—40). It must have been a truth 
 commonly recognized by the people that 
 though ‘‘the lot was cast into the lap, the 
 whole disposing thereof was of the Lord” 
 (Prov. xvi. 33).—The practice of casting lots 
 was not wholly discontinued till it was exer- 
 
 2 Lev. xvi. 8; Num. xxvi. 55; Josh. vii¥ 
 14—18, xiii. 6, xviii, 8; 1S. xiv. 41, 42; Acts 
 i; 26, ; 
 
v. I—13.| 
 
 cised in completing the number of the twelve 
 Apostles (Acts i. 26). It seems worthy of 
 remark, that the Urim and the Thummim ap- 
 pear to have fallen into disuse as the prophetic 
 office became more distinct and important in 
 and after the reign of David; and that we 
 hear nothing of the casting of lots in the 
 Apostolic History after the day of Pentecost, 
 when the Holy Ghost was given to lead be- 
 
 PROG ID US, XOCT X., 
 
 2 Lev. 8. 2. 
 & g. 2. 
 
 lievers into all truth. In each case, the lower 
 
 CHAPTER XXIX. 
 
 1 The sacrifice and ceremonies of consecrating 
 the priests.. 38 The continual burnt offering. 
 48 God’s promise to dwell among the children 
 of Israel. 
 
 ND this zs the thing that thou 
 shalt do unto them to hallow 
 them, to minister unto me in the 
 priest’s office: “Take one young bul- 
 lock, and two rams without blemish, 
 
 2, And unleavened bread, and cakes 
 unleavened tempered with oil, and 
 wafers unleavened anointed with oil: 
 of wheaten flour shalt thou make 
 them. 
 
 3 And thou shalt put them into 
 one basket, and bring them in the 
 basket, with the bullock and the two 
 rams. 
 
 4 And Aaron and his sons thou 
 shalt bring unto the door of the ta- 
 bernacle of the congregation, and shalt 
 wash them with water. 
 
 5 And thou shalt take the gar- 
 ments, and put upon Aaron the coat, 
 and the robe of the ephod, and the 
 ephod, and the breastplate, and gird 
 him with the curious girdle of the 
 ephod : 
 
 6 And thou shalt put the mitre 
 
 393 
 
 mode of revelation appears to give way to 
 the higher}, 
 
 1 It has been objected that there is nothing 
 in the etymology of the names of the Urim and 
 the Thummim to justify the conjecture that they 
 were connected with casting lots. But the words 
 in their proper meaning probably referred to the 
 result obtained (z.¢. the knowledge of the divine 
 will) rather than to the mere material instruments 
 employed. 
 
 upon his head, and put the holy 
 crown upon the mitre. 
 
 7 Then shalt thou take the anoint- 
 ing ?oil, and pour it upon his head, ? chap. 30. 
 and anoint him. “A 
 
 8 And thou shalt bring his sons, 
 and put coats upon them. 
 
 g And thou shalt gird them with 
 girdles, Aaron and his sons, and * put t Heb. 
 the bonnets on them: and the priest’s 
 office shall be theirs for a perpetual 
 statute: and thou shalt '*consecrate Heb. 
 
 : Jill the 
 Aaron and his sons. hand of, 
 
 10 And thou shalt cause a bullock jf nae 
 to be brought before the tabernacle of 
 the congregation: and @ Aaron and ¢Lev. x. 4. 
 his sons shall put their hands upon 
 the head of the bullock. 
 
 11 And thou shalt kill the bullock 
 before the Lorn, dy the door of the 
 tabernacle of the congregation. 
 
 12 And thou shalt take of the 
 blood of the bullock, and put zt upon 
 the horns of the altar with thy finger, , 
 and pour all the blood beside the bot- 1 Th scone 
 
 tom of the altar. ish 
 13 And “thou shalt take all the fat 474 
 
 that covereth the inwards, and 'the doctors, to 
 
 caul that is above the liver, and the ee 
 
 ” Cuap. XXIX. 
 Tue CONSECRATION OF THE PRIESTS. 
 I — 37. 
 The account of the consecration of Aaron 
 
 and his sons, in accordance with the direc- 
 tions contained in this chapter, is given in 
 Lev. viii., ix. The details of the ceremonies 
 involve many important references to the Law 
 of the Offerings contained in Lev. i.—vii, 
 Most of the notes on these details are there- 
 fore given under the narrative of the conse- 
 cration in Leviticus. 
 1, 2, 3. See on Lev. vill. 2, 26. 
 
 2. cakes unleavened tempered with oil | 
 
 These are called cakes of oiled bread in Lev. 
 viii. 26. See on Ley, il. 4. 
 
 4. door of the tabernacle] entrance of 
 the tent, See on Lev. viii. 3. 
 
 awash them] See on Lev. vill. 6. 
 
 5, 6. See on Lev. viii. 7, 8, 9; Exod. 
 XXviil. 7,,8, 3I—39, XXXIX. 30. 
 
 6. the holy crown] See on Xxxix. 20. 
 
 7, the anointing oil] See Lev. vill, 1c—12; 
 Exod, xxx. 22—25. 
 
 8, See on Lev. viii. 13; cf. Exod, xxxix, 
 4l. 
 
 10—14. See on Levy, viii. 14-17; cf. Lev. 
 IV. 3. 
 
394 EROD US ex OURS [v. 14-30. 
 
 two kidneys, and the fat that zs upon 
 them, and burn ¢hem upon the altar. 
 
 14 But the flesh of the bullock, 
 and his skin, and his dung, shalt thou 
 burn with fire without the camp: it 
 is a sin offering. 
 
 15 { ‘Thou shalt also take one 
 ram; and Aaron and his sons shall 
 put their hands upon the head of 
 the ram. 
 
 16 And thou shalt slay the ram, 
 and thou shalt take his blood, and 
 sprinkle zt round about upon the altar. 
 
 17 And thou shalt cut the ram in 
 pieces, and wash the inwards of him, 
 and his legs, and put them unto his 
 
 l Or, ufon. pieces, and ' unto his head. 
 
 18 And thou shalt burn the whole 
 ram upon the altar: it zs a burnt of- 
 fering unto the Lorp: it 7s a sweet 
 savour, an offering made by fire unto 
 the Lorp. 
 
 1g 4 And thou shalt take the 
 other ram; and Aaron and his sons 
 shall put their hands upon the head 
 of the ram. 
 
 20 Then shalt thou kill the ram, 
 and take of his blood, and put zt upon 
 the tip of the right ear of Aaron, and 
 upon the tip of the right ear of his 
 sons, and upon the thumb of their 
 right hand, and upon the great toe of 
 their right foot, and sprinkle the blood 
 upon the altar round about. 
 
 21 And thou shalt take of the blood 
 that zs upon the altar, and of the 
 anointing oil, and sprinkle zt upon 
 Aaron, and upon his garments, and 
 upon his sons, and upon the garments 
 of his sons with him: and he shall 
 be hallowed, and his garments, and 
 his sons, and his sons’ garments with 
 him. 
 
 22 Also thou shalt take of the ram 
 
 the fat and the rump, and the fat that 
 covereth the inwards, and the caul 
 above the liver, and the two kidneys, 
 and the fat that zs upon them, and 
 the right shoulder; for it 7s a ram of 
 consecration : 
 
 23 And one loaf of bread, and one 
 cake of oiled bread, and one wafer 
 out of the basket of the unleavened 
 bread that 7s before the Lorn: 
 
 24 And thou shalt put all in the 
 hands of Aaron, and in the hands of 
 his sons; and shalt 'wave them for a'r, 
 wave offering before the Lorn. nina 
 
 25 And thou shalt receive them of 
 their hands, and burn them upon the 
 altar for a burnt offering, for a sweet 
 savour before the Lorp: it zs an of- 
 fering made by fire unto the Lorp. 
 
 26 And thou shalt take the breast 
 of the ram of Aaron’s consecration, 
 and wave it for a wave offering before 
 the Lorn: and it shall be thy part. 
 
 27 And thou shalt sanctify the 
 breast of the wave offering, and the 
 shoulder of the heave offering, which 
 is waved, and which is heaved up, of 
 the ram of the consecration, even of 
 that which is for Aaron, and of that 
 which is for his sons: 
 
 28 And it shall be Aaron’s and his 
 sons’ by a statute for ever from the 
 children of Israel: for it 7s an heave 
 offering: and it shall be an heave 
 offering from the children of Israel of 
 the sacrifice of their peace offerings, 
 even their heave offering unto the 
 Lorp. 
 
 29 1 And the holy garments of 
 Aaron shall be his sons’ after him, to 
 be anointed therein, and to be conse- 
 crated in them. 
 
 30 And ‘that son that is priest in t Heb. 
 
 ‘ hi. 
 his stead shall put them on seven days, on 
 
 eT ee nn 
 
 15—18. Seeon Lev. viii. 18—21. 
 19—28. See on Lev. viii. 22—29. 
 
 27. On Waving and Heaving, first men- 
 tioned in their connection with the ceremonies 
 of the Altar in this chapter, see preface to 
 Leviticus. It should be noticed that the right 
 shoulder (rather perhaps the right leg, see Lev. 
 vil. 32) was to be formally presented to the 
 
 priests (vv. 22, 24), in order to make a re- 
 cognition of the Law of the Heave-offering, 
 though, on this special occasion, it was not to 
 be eaten like an ordinary heave-offering, but 
 to be made part of the burnt-offering. (v. 25.) 
 
 28. ‘This law is repeated Lev. vii. 34. Cf. 
 Lev. x. 14, 15; Num. vi. 20. 
 
 29, 30. See on Ley. viii. 30, 33. 
 
3 
 4 
 
 I. 
 Matt. 12. 
 
 Vv. 3I—4I1. | 
 
 when he cometh into the tabernacle 
 of the congregation to minister in the 
 holy place. 
 
 31 @ And thou shalt take the ram 
 of the consecration, and seethe his 
 flesh in the holy place. 
 
 32 And Aaron and his sons shall 
 eat the flesh of the ram, and the 
 
 fLev.8. /bread that 7s in the basket, dy the 
 
 door of the tabernacle of the congre- 
 gation. 
 
 33 And they shall eat those things 
 wherewith the atonement was made, 
 to consecrate and to sanctify them: 
 but a stranger shall not eat thereof, 
 because they are holy. 
 
 34 And if ought of the flesh of the 
 consecrations, or of the bread, remain 
 unto the morning, then thou shalt 
 burn the remainder with fire: it shall 
 not be eaten, because it zs holy. 
 
 35 And thus shalt thou do unto 
 Aaron, and to his sons, according to 
 all things which | have commanded 
 thee: seven days shalt thou consecrate 
 them. 
 
 36 And thou shalt offer every day 
 
 a bullock for a sin offering for atone- 
 
 ye oe ee Soe XX OK, 
 
 ©» 
 
 ment: and thou shalt cleanse the altar, 
 when thou hast made an atonement 
 for it, and thou shalt anoint it, to 
 sanctify it. 
 
 37 Seven days thou shalt make an 
 atonement for the altar, and sanctify 
 it; and it shall be an altar most holy: 
 whatsoever toucheth the altar shall be 
 holy. 
 
 38 4 Now this zs that which thou 
 
 Gr 
 
 shalt offer upon the altar; two Numb. 
 
 28 
 
 lambs of the first year day by day 
 continually. 
 
 39 The one lamb thou shalt offer 
 in the morning; and the other lamb 
 thou shalt offer at even: 
 
 40 And with the one lamb a tenth 
 deal of flour mingled with the fourth 
 part of an hin of beaten oil; and the 
 fourth part of an hin of wine for a 
 drink offering. 
 
 41 And the other lamb thou shalt 
 offer at even, and shalt do thereto ac- 
 cording to the meat offering of the 
 morning, and according to the drink 
 offering thereof, for a sweet savour, 
 an offering made by fire unto the 
 Lorp. 
 
 31—34. See on Lev. viii. 31, 32. 
 
 33. astranger| one of another family, 
 i.e. in this case, one not of the family of 
 Aaron. The ‘Hebrew word (zar) is the same 
 as is used xxx. 33, Deut. xxv. 5. 
 
 35, 36. See on Lev. viii. 33, 35. 
 
 37. See on Lev. viii. 11. 
 
 The Continual Burnt-offering. 
 38—46, 
 
 38. this is that which thou shalt offer| The 
 primary purpose of the national Altar is here 
 set forth. On it was to be offered ‘‘the con- 
 tinual Burnt-offering” (v. 42), consisting of 
 a yearling lamb with its meat-offering and its 
 drink-offering, and this was to figure the daily 
 renewal of the consecration of the nation. 
 The victim slain every morning and every 
 evening was an acknowledgment that the life 
 of the people belonged to Jehovah, and the 
 offering of meal was an acknowledgment that 
 all their right works were His due (see on 
 Ley. ii.); while the incense symbolized their 
 daily prayers. (See on xxx. 6—8, 
 
 39. at even] Literally, between the two 
 evenings. See on xii. 6, 
 
 40. a tenth deal] i.e. the tenth part of an 
 Ephah; it is sometimes called an Omer (Exod. 
 
 _~ 
 
 xvi. 36; Num, xxviii. 5. See on Lev. xxiii, 13). 
 ‘The Ephah seems to have been rather less than 
 four gallons and a half (see on Lev. xix. 36); 
 and the tenth deal of flour may have weighed 
 about 3 lbs, 2 oz. 
 
 an hin} The word hin, which here first 
 occurs, appears to be Egyptian. ‘The measure 
 was one-sixth of an ephah. ‘The quarter of a 
 hin was therefore about a pint and a half. See 
 
 on Ley. xix. 36. 
 
 beaten oil| i.e. oil of the best quality. See 
 ON XXVii. 20. 
 
 wine for a drink=offering| ‘The earliest men- 
 tion of the Drink-offering is found in connec- 
 tion with Jacob’s setting up the stone at Bethel 
 (Gen. xxxv. 14). But it is here first associated 
 with the rites of the Altar. ‘The Law of the 
 Drink-offering is stated Num. xv. 5 sq. Nothing 
 whatever is expressly said in the Old Testa- 
 ment regarding the mode in which the wine 
 was treated: but it would seem probable, from 
 the prohibition that it should not be poured 
 upon the Altar of Incense (Exod. xxx. 9), 
 that it used to be poured on the Altar of 
 Burnt-offering, Josephus (‘ Ant.’ IT. 9. § 4) 
 says that it was poured round the Altar (epi 
 rov Bopov): it may have been cast upon it 
 in the same way as the blood of the Burnt- 
 
 nek 
 
396 
 
 42 This shall be a continual burnt 
 offering throughout your generations 
 at the door of the tabernacle of the 
 congregation before the Lorp: where 
 I will meet you, to speak there unto 
 thee. 
 
 43 And there I will meet with the 
 
 EXODUS /XKIXI ERK 
 
 Tv. azap 
 
 CHAPTER XXX. 
 
 t The altar of incense. 11 The ransom of 
 souls. 17 The brasen laver. 22 The holy 
 anointing owl. 34 Lhe composition of the 
 
 perfume. 
 ND thou shalt make an altar to 
 burn incense upon: of shittim 
 
 r22, children of Israel, and "he tabernacle wood shalt thou make it. 
 ‘shall be sanctified by my glory. 2 A cubit shall be the length there- 
 
 44 And I will sanctify the taber- of, and a cubit the breadth thereof; 
 nacle of the congregation, and the foursquare shall it be: and two cubits 
 altar: I will sanctify also both Aaron shall be the height thereof: the horns 
 and his sons, to minister to me in the thereof shall be of the same. 
 priest’s office. 3 And thou shalt overlay it with 
 
 *Lev.26. 45 @ And *I will dwellamong the pure gold, the ‘top thereof, and the t Heb. 
 2Cor.6, Children of Israel, and will be their ‘sides thereof round about, and the 227% 
 “i God. horns thereof; and thou shalt make hes 
 
 46 And they shall know that I am unto it a crown of gold round about. wats. 
 
 the Lorp their God, that brought 
 them forth out of the land of Egypt, 
 that I may dwell among them: I am 
 
 the Lorn their God. 
 
 4 And two golden rings shalt thou 
 make to it under the crown of it, by 
 
 the two ‘corners thereof, upon the ei 
 
 two sides of it shalt thou make it; and 
 
 offering and the Peace-offering (see on Lev. i.), 
 or at its foot (és Oeuédua), Ecclus, i. rs. 
 This appears to agree with the patriarchal 
 usage mentioned Gen, xxxv. 14. 
 
 42. at the door of the tabernacle] at the 
 entrance of the Tent. 
 
 43. the (tabernacle) shall be sanctified] 
 The word tabernacle is certainly not the right 
 one to be here supplied. From the context 
 it may be inferred that what is meant is the 
 spot in which Jehovah promises to meet with 
 the assembly of His people, who were not ad- 
 mitted into the Mishkan itself, as the priests 
 Were (see xxv. 22); that is, the Holy Pre- 
 cinct between the Tabernacle and the Altar. 
 See Lev. x. 17, 18.—This verse should be 
 rendered, And in that place will I meet 
 with the children of Israel, and it 
 Shall be sanctified with my glory. 
 
 44, 45. ‘The purpose of the formal con- 
 secration of the Sanctuary and of the priests 
 who served in it was, that the whole nation 
 which Jehovah had set free from its bondage 
 in Egypt might be consecrated in its daily 
 life, and dwell continually in His presence as 
 ‘‘a kingdom of priests and an holy nation.” 
 
 46. Cf. Gen. xvii. 7. 
 CHAP, XXX. 
 The Altar of Incense. 
 I—Io. (XXXvil. 25—28, xl. 26, 27.) 
 
 This passage would seem naturally to be- 
 long to ch. xxv,, where directions are given 
 for the whole of the furniture of the Taber- 
 nacle, except the Altar of Incense, No satis- 
 
 factory reason appears for its occurrence in 
 this place, In the lists of the articles (xxxi. 8, 
 XXxv. 15), and in the record of their con- 
 struction (xxxvil. 25—-28), and of their ar- 
 rangement in the Sanctuary (xl. 26, 27), the 
 Altar of Incense is mentioned in due order. 
 It should however be observed, that the in- 
 structions here given respecting it are distin- 
 guished from those relating to the other arti- 
 cles in ch. xxv. in as far as they comprise 
 directions for the mode in which it was to be 
 used (vv. 7—I0). 
 
 The Altar was to be a casing of boards of 
 shittim wood (see on xxv. 5), 18 inches square 
 and three feet in height (taking the cubit as 
 18 inches), entirely covered with plates of 
 gold. Four “thorns” were to project upwards 
 at the corners like those of the. Altar of 
 Burnt-offering (xxvil. 2), A moulding ‘of 
 gold was to run round the top. On each of 
 two opposite sides there was to be a gold 
 ring through which the staves were to be put 
 when it was moved from place to place. 
 
 3. a crown of gold] a moulding of 
 gold. See on xxv. 11, 
 
 4, by the two corners thereof| The He- 
 brew word does not mean corners. See mar- 
 gin. ‘The sense of the first part of the verse 
 appears to be: dnd two gold rings shalt thou 
 make for it under its moulding; om its tavo 
 Sides shalt thou make them (i.e. one ring on 
 each side). So de Wette, Knobel, Schott, 
 Wogue. ‘The Ark and the Shewbread Table 
 had each four rings, two for the pole on each 
 side; but the Incense Altar, being shorter, 
 
Vv. 5—12.] : 
 
 they shall be for places for the staves 
 to bear it withal. 
 
 5 And thou shalt make the staves 
 of shittim wood, and overlay them 
 with gold. 
 
 6 And thou shalt put it before the 
 vail that 7s by the ark of the testimony, 
 before the mercy seat that zs over the 
 testimony, where I will meet with 
 thee. 
 
 7 And Aaron shall burn thereon 
 
 BSODUS.i xX xs. 
 
 thereon, nor burnt sacrifice, nor meat 
 offering; neither shall ye pour drink 
 offering thereon. 
 
 10 And Aaron shall make an atone- 
 ment upon the horns of it once in a 
 year with the blood of the sin offering 
 of atonements: once in the year shall 
 he make atonement upon it through- 
 out your generations: it zs most holy 
 unto the Lorp. 
 
 rr @ And the Lorp spake unto 
 
 397 
 
 cae o¢ sweet incense every morning: when Moses, saying, 
 
 spice. he dresseth the lamps, he shall burn 12 *When thou takest the sum of ¢ Numb. 
 incense upon it. the children of Israel after their num- t Heb. 
 
 1 Or, them that 
 
 8 And when Aaron 'lighteth the 
 
 ber, then shall they give every man a aye to be 
 lamps ‘at even, he shall burn incense 
 
 setteth up. 
 Heb. ransom for his soul unto the Lorp, numberet, 
 
 between 
 the tuo 
 evens. 
 
 upon it, a perpetual incense before the 
 Lorp throughout your generations. 
 9 Ye shall offer no strange incense 
 
 when thou numberest them; that 
 there be no plague among them, when 
 thou numberest them. 
 
 was sufficiently supported by a single ring on 
 each side, without risk of its being thrown off 
 its balance. 
 
 6. ‘The place for the Altar of Incense was 
 outside the vail, opposite to the Ark of the 
 Covenant and between the Candlestick on the 
 south side and the Shewbread Table on the 
 north (xl. 22—24). It appears to have been 
 regarded as having a more intimate connection 
 with the Holy of Holies than the other things 
 in the Holy Place (see 1 K. vi. 22; Rev. viil. 
 3; also Heb. ix. 4, if we are to identify it 
 with the @vpcar/piov there mentioned, see 
 on Ley. xvi. 12); and the mention of the 
 Mercy-seat in this verse, if we associate with 
 it the significance of incense as figuring the 
 prayers of the Lord’s people (Ps, cxli. 2 ; Rev. 
 v. 8, viii. 3, 4), seems to furnish additional 
 ground for an inference that the Incense 
 
 Altar took precedence of the Table of Show-— 
 
 bread and the Candlestick. 
 
 7. the lamps] See on xxvii. 21. 
 
 burn incense| ‘The word here and elsewhere 
 applied to the burning of incense is the same 
 as that used xxv. 37. See note. 
 
 7,8. The offering of the Incense accom- 
 panied that of the morning and evening sacri- 
 fice. ‘The two forms of offering symbolized 
 the spirit of man reaching after communion 
 with Jehovah, both in act and_ utterance, ac- 
 cording to the words of the Psalmist, ‘‘ Let 
 my prayer be set forth before thee as incense; 
 and the lifting up of my hands as the evening 
 sacrifice.” Ps. cxli. 2. 
 
 9. By this regulation, the symbolism of 
 the Altar of Incense was kept free from ambi- 
 guity. Atonement was made by means of the 
 victim on the Brazen altar in the court out- 
 
 side; the prayers of the reconciled worshippers 
 had their type within the Tabernacle. 
 
 10. See on Lev. xvi. 18, 19. 
 shall he make atonement| rather, shall 
 atonement be made. 
 
 The Ransom of Souls. 
 TI—16. (XXXvill. -25—28.) 
 
 11, 12. The materials for the textile work, 
 the wood, the gold, and the bronze, were 
 to be the free-will offerings of those who 
 could contribute them (xxv, 2, XxXxv. 21 Sq.). 
 But the silver was to be obtained by an en- 
 forced capitation on every adult male Israelite, 
 the poor and the rich having to pay the same 
 (v.15). Hence, in the estimate of the metals 
 collected for the work (xxxvili, 24—31) the 
 gold and the bronze are termed offerings 
 (strictly, wave-offerings, see preface to 
 Leviticus), while the silver is spoken of as 
 ‘‘the silver of them that were numbered.” 
 But this payment is brought into its highest 
 relation in being here accounted a spiritual 
 obligation laid on each individual, a tribute 
 expressly exacted by Jehovah, Every man of 
 Israel who would escape a curse (v, 12) had 
 in this way to make a practical acknowledg- 
 ment that he had a share in the Sanctuary, 
 on the occasion of his being recognised as one 
 of the covenanted people (v. 16).—Silver was 
 the metal commonly used for current coin, 
 See Gen, xxii, 16. 
 
 12. Whenthoutakest the sum of the children 
 of Israel] ‘The silver must have been contri- 
 buted at this time, along with the other 
 materials, since it was used in the Tabernacle, 
 which was completed on the first day of the 
 first month of the second year after coming 
 
t Heb. 
 
 multiply. 
 t Heb. 
 
 diminish, 
 
 13 This they shall give, every one 
 that passeth among them that are num- 
 bered, half a shekel after the shekel of 
 
 . the sanctuary: (a shekel 7s twenty 
 gerahs:) an half shekel shall be the 
 offering of the Lorn. 
 
 14 Every one that passeth among 
 them that are numbered, from twenty 
 years old and above, shall give an 
 offering unto the Lorp. 
 
 15 The rich shall not tgive more, 
 and the poor shall not ‘give less 
 than half a shekel, when they give an 
 offering unto the Lorn, to make an 
 atonement for your souls, 
 
 16 And thou shalt take the atone- 
 
 out of Egypt (xl. 17). But the command to 
 take the complete census of the nation appears 
 not to have been given until the first day of 
 the second month of that year (Num, i. 1), 
 On comparing the words of Exod. xxx. 12 
 with those of Num, i, r—3, we may perhaps 
 infer that the first passage relates to a mere 
 counting of the adult Israelites at the time 
 when the money was taken from each, and 
 that what the latter passage enjoins was a 
 formal enrolment of them according to their 
 genealogies and their order of military service. 
 
 a ransom for his soul| What the sincere 
 worshipper thus paid was at once the fruit 
 and the sign of his faith in the goodness of 
 Jehovah, who had redeemed hin and brought 
 him into the Covenant. (See Introd. note to 
 ch, xxv.) Hence the payment is rightly called 
 a ransom in as much as it involved a personal 
 appropriation of the fact of his redemption, 
 On the word soul, see on Lev. xvii. 11. 
 
 that there be no plague] i.e. that they might 
 not incur punishment for the neglect and con- 
 tempt of spiritual privileges. Cf, 1 Cor, xi. 
 27—30; and the Exhortation in our Com- 
 munion Service. 
 
 13. half a shekel| The probable weight of 
 silver in the half-shekel would now be worth 
 about 1s. 33d. (See on Exod, xxxvili, 25.) 
 Gerah is, literally, a bean, probably the bean 
 of the carob or locust-tree (Aben-Ezra), It 
 was used as the name of a small weight, as our 
 word grain came into use from a grain of 
 wheat. ‘The purpose of the definition of the 
 shekel here given is not quite certain, It 
 might seem to countenance the rabbinical 
 notion that there were two kinds of shekel, 
 the shekel of the Sanctuary consisting of twenty 
 gerahs, and the common shekel. (See on 
 XXxviil, 24.) But it is more likely that the 
 weight is defined rather for the sake of em- 
 phasis, to intimate that the just value should 
 be given precisely. The words in question 
 
 EXODUS, XXX. 
 
 [v. 13—19. 
 
 ment money of the children of Israel, 
 and shalt appoint it for the service of 
 the tabernacle of the congregation; 
 that it may be a memorial unto the 
 children of Israel before the Lorn, to 
 make an atonement for your souls. 
 
 17 4 And the Lorp spake unto 
 Moses, saying, 
 
 18 ‘Thou shalt also make a laver of 
 brass, and his foot a/so of brass, to 
 wash withal: and thou shalt put it 
 between the tabernacle of the con- 
 gregation and the altar, and thou shalt 
 put water therein. 
 
 1g For Aaron and his sons shall wash 
 their hands and their feet thereat : 
 
 might rather be rendered: ‘‘half a shekel after 
 the shekel of the sanctuary, twenty gerahs 
 to the shekel; the half shekel shall 
 be the offering (Heb. terumah, as in vv, 
 14, 15; see xxv, 2) to Jehovah.” 
 
 15. Every Israelite stood in one and the 
 same relation to Jehovah, See on vv, 11, 12. 
 
 16. tabernacle of the congregation] Tent 
 of meeting. 
 
 a memorial unto the children of Israel] ‘The 
 silver used in the Tabernacle was a memorial 
 to remind each man of his position before the 
 Lord, as one of the covenanted people. 
 
 The Laver of Brass. 
 17—21, (XxXxviil. 8.) 
 
 18. a dlaver of brass] ‘The bronze for the 
 Laver and its foot was supplied from the 
 bronze mirrors of the women ‘‘ who assembled 
 at the door of the tabernacle.” ‘The women 
 seem to have voluntarily given up these articles 
 of luxury (see on xxxvill. 8), Bronze mirrors 
 were much used by the ancient Egyptians. 
 Wilkinson, Vol. 11. p. 345. No hint is given 
 as to the form of the Laver. It may have 
 been made with an immediate view to use 
 of the simplest and most convenient form, 
 ‘The Brazen Sea and the ten Lavers that served 
 the same purpose in the Temple of Solomon, 
 were elaborately wrought in artistic designs 
 and are minutely described (1 K. vil. 23—29). 
 
 tabernacle of the congregatiou| Tent of 
 meeting. 
 
 19. «avash their hands and ther feet | 
 Whenever a priest had to enter the Taber- 
 nacle, or to offer a victim on the Altar, he 
 was required to wash his hands and his feet ; 
 but on, certain solemn occasions he was re= 
 quired to bathe his whole person (xxix. 4 ; 
 Lev. xvi. 4). The Laver must also have fur- 
 nished the water for washing those parts of 
 the victims that needed cleansing (Lev. i. 9). : 
 
v. 20—24.| 
 
 20 When they go into the taber- 
 nacle of the congregation, they shall 
 wash with water, that they die not; 
 or when they come near to the altar 
 to minister, to burn offering made by 
 fire unto the Lorn: 
 
 21 So they shall wash their hands 
 and their feet, that they die not: and 
 it shall be a statute for ever to them, 
 even to him and to his seed through- 
 out their generations. 
 
 EXODUS! ¥ XX. 599. 
 
 22 4 Moreover the Lorp spake 
 unto Moses, saying, 
 
 23 Take thou also unto thee prin- 
 cipal spices, of pure myrrh five hun- 
 dred shekels, and of sweet cinnamon 
 half so much, even two hundred and 
 fifty shekels, and of sweet calamus two 
 hundred and fifty shekels, 
 
 24 And of cassia five hundred she- 
 kels, after the shekel of the sanctuary, 
 
 and of oil olive an © hin: ye 
 
 20. tabernacle of the congregation| Tent 
 of meeting. 
 
 that they die not| See on xxviii. 35. 
 
 to burn offering made by fire unto the Lorp] 
 Literally, to send up in fire an offering to 
 Jehovah. ‘The verb is the same as in wv. 7 
 and xxv 37. 
 
 The Holy Anointing Oil, 
 22—33. (XXXVil. 29.) 
 
 23. principal spices| i.e. the best spices. 
 
 pure myrrh| ‘There cannot be much doubt 
 as to the identity of this substance from its 
 name in different languages (Hebrew, mor; 
 Arabic, murr ; Greek, cpvpva; Latin, myrrha). 
 It is a gum which comes from the stem of a 
 low, thorny, ragged tree, that growsin Arabia 
 Felix and Eastern Africa, called by botanists 
 Balsamodendron myrrha. ‘The word here 
 rendered pure, is literally, freely flowing, an 
 epithet which is explained by the fact that the 
 best myrrh is said to exude spontaneously 
 from the bark (Plin. ‘H. N.’ xt. 35; Theo- 
 phrast. ‘de Odorib,’ 29), while that of inferior 
 quality oozes out in greater quantity from 
 incisions made in the bark. On the estimation 
 in which myrrh was held, see Cant. 1. 13; 
 Matt. ii. rr; on its use as a perfume, Ps, xlv. 
 8; Prov, vii. 17; Cant. v. 5; and on its use 
 in embalming, John xix. 39. This is the first 
 mention of it in the Hebrew text of the Old 
 Testament, but in our version it is named by 
 mistake in Gen. xxxvii. 25, xlili. 11. 
 
 jive hundred shekeis| Probably rather more 
 than 154+1bs. See on xxxviil. 24. 
 
 sweet cinnamon| ‘This substance is satis- 
 factorily identified, like the preceding one, on 
 account of its name (Heb. Kinnamon; Gr. xw- 
 vapopov; Lat. cinnamomum). It is obtained 
 from a tree allied to the laurel that grows in 
 Ceylon and other islands of the Indian Ocean, 
 known in Botany as the Cinnamomun zeyla- 
 nicum, It is the inner rind of the tree dried 
 in the sun, The origin of the name appears to 
 be found in the Malay language (Ritter, Kno- 
 bel), Herodotus says that the word is Phoe- 
 nician, but this means no more than that the 
 Greeks learned it from the Pheenicians. It 
 is probable that Cinnamon was imported from 
 
 India in very early times by the people of 
 Ophir, and that it was brought with other 
 spices from the south part of Arabia by the 
 trading caravans that visited Egypt and Syria. 
 Hence, even in later times, Cinnamon and 
 other Indian spices were spoken of as produc- 
 tions of the land of the Sabeans (Strabo, xv1, 
 pp. 769,774, 778). If weaccept this explana- 
 tion, the mention of these spices in Exodus 
 may be taken as the earliest notice we have con- 
 nected with commerce with the remote East. 
 Cinnamon is elsewhere mentioned in the Scrip- 
 tures only, Prov. vii. 17; Cant. iv, 14; Rev. 
 XVlil. 13. 
 
 two hundred and fifty shekels| Probably 
 about 7lbs. r40z. See on xxxviil. 24. 
 
 sweet calamus| ‘The word rendered calamus 
 (kaneh) is the common Hebrew name for a 
 stalk, reed, or cane (Gen, xli. 5; 1 K. xiv. 15; 
 Ezek, xli, 8). The fragrant cane (or rush) 
 here spoken of is mentioned in Isa, xliii. 24, in 
 Jer. vi, 20 (where it is called in the Hebrew 
 ‘‘the good cane from a far country”), and in 
 Cant. iv. 14; Ezek, xxvii. 19, where it is call- 
 ed simply cane. It was probably what is now 
 known in India as the Lemon Grass (dn- 
 dropogon schoenanthus),. Aromatic reeds were 
 known to the ancients as the produce of India 
 and the region of the Euphrates (Xenophon, 
 ¢ Anab.’ 1. 5, §1; Diosc, ‘ Mat. Med.’ I. 16). 
 ‘The statements that such reeds were produced 
 in the neighbourhood of Libanus (Theophr. 
 FHP, (x, 2. C PO? vioisy bolypiua v.45 )s 
 near the Lake of Gennesaret (Strabo, XVI. 
 p. 755) and in the Land of the Sabzans 
 (Strabo, xvi. p. 7783; cf. Diod. 11. 49), may 
 be regarded as some of the many mistakes 
 which have arisen from confounding the 
 country from which a commodity is obtained 
 with that of its original production, 
 
 24. cassia] The Hebrew name (hiddah) 
 is found elsewhere only in Ezek. xxvii. 19, 
 where it is associated, as it is here, with sweet 
 cane. ‘The word rendered cassia in Ps, xlv, 8 
 is a different one, but it is probable that the 
 same substance is denoted by it. Most of the 
 ancient versions, and all modern authorities, 
 seem to be in favour of cassia being the true 
 rendering of 4iddab. Cassia is the inner bark 
 
 ¢ chap. 29. 
 
NOr, 
 
 perpumer. 
 
 400 
 
 25 And thou shalt make it an oil 
 of holy ointment, an ointment com- 
 pound after the art of the ! apothe- 
 cary: it shall be an holy anointing oil. 
 
 26 And thou shalt anoint the ta- 
 bernacle of the congregation there- 
 with, and the ark of the testimony, 
 
 27 And the table and all his ves- 
 sels, and the candlestick and his ves- 
 sels, and the altar of incense, 
 
 28 And the altar of burnt offering 
 with all his vessels, and the laver and 
 his foot. 
 
 29 And thou shalt sanctify them, 
 that they may be most holy: what- 
 soever toucheth them shall be holy. 
 
 30 And thou shalt anoint Aaron 
 and his sons, and consecrate them, 
 
 of an Indian tree (Cinnamonum cassia), which 
 differs from that which produces cinnamon in 
 the shape of its leaves and some other particu- 
 lars. It bears a strong resemblance to cinna- 
 mon, but it is more pungent, and of coarser 
 texture. It was probably in ancient times, as 
 it is at present, by far less costly than cinna- 
 mon, and it may have been on this account 
 that it was used in double quantity. 
 
 an hin| Probably about six pints. See on 
 Dev sxix 36, 
 
 25.] an oil of holy ointment] rather, a 
 holy anointing oil. 
 
 after the art of the apothecary| According 
 to Jewish tradition, the essences of the spices 
 were first extracted, and then mixed with the 
 oil (Otho, ‘Lex. Rabb.’ p. 486). ‘That some 
 such process was employed is probable from 
 the great proportion of solid matter compared 
 with the oil. ‘The preparation of the Anoint- 
 ing Oil, as well as of the Incense, was en- 
 trusted to Bezaleel (xxxvii. 29), and the care 
 of preserving it to Eleazar the son of Aaron 
 (Num. iv.16), Ina later age, it was prepared 
 by the sons of the priests (x Chro. ix. 30). 
 
 26—81.] Cf. xl. g—15. See on Lev. 
 Vill, IO—12. 
 
 26. tabernacle of the congregation] Tent 
 of meeting. 
 
 29.] See on xxix. 37. 
 
 32. upon man’s flesh] i.e. on the persons 
 of those that were not priests who might 
 employ it for such anointing as was usual 
 on festive occasions (Ps. civ. 15 ; Prov. xxvii. 9 ; 
 Matt. vi. 17, &c.). 
 
 33. a stranger] one of another 
 family, See on , xxix. 33. The Holy 
 Anointing Oil was not even to be used for 
 the anointing of a king. See on 1 K.i. 39. 
 
 EXODUS AX XS 
 
 [v- 25-34 
 
 that they may minister unto me in 
 the priest’s office. 
 
 31 And thou shalt speak unto the 
 children of Israel, saying, This shall 
 be an holy anointing oil unto me 
 throughout your generations. 
 
 32 Upon man’s flesh shall it not 
 be poured, neither shall ye make any 
 other like it, after the composition of 
 it: it zs holy, and it shall be holy 
 unto you. 
 
 33 Whosoever compoundeth any 
 like it, or whosoever putteth any of 
 it upon a stranger, shall even be cut 
 off from his people. 
 
 34. @ And the Lorp said unto 
 Moses, ‘Take unto thee sweet spices, 
 stacte, and onycha, and galbanum; 
 
 cut off from his people.| See on Gen. xvii. 
 14, Exod. xxxi. 14, and Lev. vil. 20. 
 
 The Holy Incense. 
 34—38. (XXXVIl. 29.) 
 
 34.] The Incense, like the Anointing Oil, 
 consisted of four aromatic ingredients, 
 
 stacte| ‘The Hebrew word is nataph (i.e. a 
 drop), which occurs in its simple sense in Job 
 XXXVi. 27. Our version and the Vulgate have 
 adopted the word used by the LX X. (araxrn), 
 which, like the Hebrew, may denote anything 
 that drops, and was applied to the purest kind 
 of myrrh that drops spontaneously from the 
 tree (see on v, 23). But the substance here 
 meant, which is nowhere else mentioned in 
 the Old Testament, is generally supposed to 
 be the gum of the Storax-tree (Styrax offici- 
 nalis) found in Syria and the neighbouring 
 countries. ‘The gum was burned as a per- 
 fume in the time of Pliny (‘H. N.’ x1I. 40). 
 But it seems by no means unlikely that the 
 stacte here mentioned was the gum known as 
 Benzoin, or Gum Benjamin, which is an im- 
 portant ingredient in the incense now used in 
 churches and mosks, and is the produce of 
 another storax-tree (Styrax benjoin) that grows 
 in Java and Sumatra. See on v. 23. It may 
 be observed that the liquid storax of com- 
 merce is obtained from quite a different tree 
 known to botanists as Liquidambar syraciflua. 
 
 onycha| Heb, shecheleth (which appears to 
 mean a shell, or scale), LXX. dvwé, Vulg. 
 onycha. ‘The word does not occur in any 
 other place in the Old Testament. The 
 Greek word was not only applied to the well- 
 known precious stone, the onyx, from its re- 
 semblance to the human nail, but to the 
 horny operculum, or cap, of a shell. The oper- 
 culum of the strombus, or wing-shell, which 
 
1 Heb. 
 salted. 
 
 V- 35—37-] 
 
 these sweet spices with pure frank- 
 incense: of each shall there be a like 
 weight: 
 
 35 And thou shalt make it a per- 
 fume, a confection after the art of 
 the apothecary, ‘tempered together, 
 pure and holy: 
 
 36 And thou shalt beat some of it 
 very small, and put of it before the 
 
 abounds in the Red Sea, is said to be employ- 
 ed at this day in the composition of perfume, 
 and to have been used as a medicine in the 
 Middle Ages under the name of Blatta Byzan- 
 tina. Pliny, most likely referring to the same 
 substance with imperfect knowledge, speaks 
 of a shell called onyx that was used both asa 
 perfume and a medicine (‘H. N.’ XxxIl. 46; 
 cf. Dioscorides, ‘Mat. Med.’ 11.11). Its iden- 
 tification with the shecheleth of the text seems 
 probable. Saadia uses the word /adanum, the 
 name of the gum of the Lada tree (see Plin. 
 ‘H.N.’ xi1. 37). Bochart, on weak ground, 
 imagined that bdellium (Gen. ii. 12) was 
 meant. See Bochart, ‘Op.’ Vol. III. p. 803; 
 Gesen. ‘'Thes.’ p. 1388. 
 
 galbanum] Heb, chelbenah; LXX. yadBavn ; 
 Vulg. galbanum, It is not mentioned else- 
 where in the Old Testament. No doubt 
 has been raised as to its identity. Galbanum 
 is now well known in medicine as a gum 
 of a yellowish brown colour, in the form 
 of either grains or masses, It burns with a 
 pungent smell which is agreeable when it is 
 combined with other smells, but not else. It 
 is imported from India, Persia, and Africa; 
 yet, strange to say, the plant from which it 
 comes is not yet certainly known, (See 
 ‘English Cyclo,’ s, v.) 
 
 pure frankincense] Heb, lebonah; LXX. hi- 
 Bavos; Vulg. thus, This was the most impor- 
 tant of the aromatic gums, Like myrrh, it 
 was regarded by itself as a precious perfume 
 (Cant, iii. 6; Matt, ii, rr), and it was used 
 unmixed with other substances in some of the 
 peetert aw (Ley. i) tT. 15, ¥. II, Vi I5, 
 &c.). ‘The Hebrew name is improperly ren- 
 dered incense in our Version in Isa, xliii, 23, Ix. 
 aie fer, Vi, 20, Xvi 26, xi. 5, It is 
 certain that the supplies of it, as well as of 
 the other spices, were obtained from Southern 
 Arabia (Isa, Ix. 6, Jer.vi.20. Cf.1 K.x. 1, 2,10, 
 15; 2 Chro, ix. 9. 14). The Greek and Latin 
 writers in general speak of its being produced 
 in that region. But they evidently knew but 
 little of the subject, as their descriptions of 
 the plant producing it differ greatly from each 
 other, (Plin. ‘H. N.’ vi. 32, x1. 31; Diod. 
 Sic. 11. 49, V. 41; Theophrast. ‘de Plant.’ 
 Ix, 1; Arrian, ‘Perip.’ with Stuck’s note, 
 p. 493; Dioscor. I. 82; Strabo, XVI. p. 774. Cf. 
 p. 782.) ‘The tree from which it is obtained 
 
 Vot, I. 
 
 Ba GDUS, XXX. 
 
 testimony in the tabernacle of the 
 congregation, where I will meet with 
 thee: it shall be unto you most 
 holy. 
 
 37 And as for the perfume which 
 thou shalt make, ye shall not make 
 to yourselves according to the compo- 
 sition thereof: it shall be unto thee 
 holy for the Lorp. 
 
 is not found in Arabia, and it was most 
 likely imported from India by the Sabe- 
 ans, like Cinnamon, Cassia, and Calamus 
 (seeonv, 23). The tree is now known as the 
 Boswellia serrata, or B. thurifera, and grows 
 abundantly in the highlands of India, where its 
 native name is Sa/ai. ‘The native name of the 
 gum is o/ibanum, and its Arabic name, /ooban: 
 the Hebrew and Greek names seem to have 
 been taken directly from the Arabic, ‘The 
 frankincense of commerce is a different sub- 
 stance, the resin of the spruce and of some 
 other kinds of fir. 
 
 35. after the art of the apothecary} ‘The 
 four substances were perhaps pounded and 
 thoroughly mixed together, and then fused 
 into a mass, 
 
 tempered together] With this rendering, 
 most Versions, modern as well as ancient, 
 and many of the best critics, agree. But, 
 according to its etymology, the Hebrew might 
 mean seasoned with salt, or (as it stands in 
 the margin) salted. It is thus explained in 
 the Talmud, which has been followed by 
 Maimonides, de Wette, Gesenius, Herxheimer, 
 Kalisch, and Keil. It is urged that this accords 
 with the law that every offering should be 
 accompanied by salt (Lev. li. 13). But this 
 law appears to refer only to the offerings of 
 what was used as food (see note in loc., and on 
 Ley. xxiv. 7), and Knobel has well observed 
 that the use of salt in incense is contrary to 
 all known analogy, since no such combination 
 is known to have been made in the incense of 
 any people.—Josephus speaks of the incense 
 of the Temple as consisting of thirteen ingre- 
 dients, but he does not state what they were 
 (‘B. J.’ v.5.§5). A list of them is however 
 given by Maimonides. A change may have 
 been made in the composition in later times. 
 
 36. A portion of the mass was to be 
 broken into small pieces and put ‘‘before the 
 testimony;” that is opposite to the Ark of 
 the Covenant, on the outside of the vail, con- 
 veniently near the Golden Altar on which it 
 was to be lighted. (See on wv. 6, and on xl. 
 20.) It may be observed that the incense 
 thus brought into relation with the Ark was 
 styled ‘‘most holy,” while the Oil is no more 
 than ‘‘holy,” v. 32. 
 
 37, 38. Cf. vv. 32, 33. The Holy In- 
 cense, like the Holy Anointing Oil, was to be 
 
 Cc 
 
 AOI 
 
402 
 
 2. 20, 
 
 @ x Chron. acs the “son..of cs 
 
 38 Whosoever shall make like un- 
 to that, to smell thereto, shall even be 
 cut off from his people. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXI. 
 
 Bezaleel and Aholiab are called and made 
 meet for the work of the tabernacle. 12 The 
 observation of the sabbath is again command- 
 ed. 18 Moses recewveth the two tables. 
 
 ND the Lorp spake unto Moses, 
 saying, 
 
 2. See, I have called by name Be- 
 
 the son of 
 
 arr sire ae 
 
 ur, of the tribe of Judah: 
 
 _ 
 
 kept in the Sanctuary, exclusively for the 
 service of Jehovah, 
 
 CHAP. ARK i 
 
 The Call of Bezaleel and Aboliab. 
 I—II, (XXXV. 30—35.) 
 
 2—6. ‘This solemn call of Bezaleel and 
 Aholiab is full of instruction. ‘Their work was 
 to be only that of handicraftsmen. Every 
 thing that they had to do was prescribed in 
 strict and precise detail. ‘There was to be no 
 exercise for their original powers of invention, 
 nor for their taste. Still it was Jehovah Him- 
 self who called them by name to their tasks, 
 and the powers which they were now called 
 upon to exercise in their respective crafts, 
 were declared to have been given them by 
 the Holy Spirit. (See on xxvii. 3.) ‘Thus is 
 every effort of skill, every sort of well-ordered 
 labour, when directed to a right end, brought 
 into the very highest sphere of association. 
 
 8. the spirit of God] Literally, a spirit of 
 Elohim, Mr Quarry (‘ Genesis,’ &c. pp. 271 
 —275) endeavours to prove that this expres- 
 sion has a lower meaning than the spirit of 
 Jehovah (which stands in our Bible, ‘‘ the spirit 
 of the Lorp”), and he would rather translate 
 it, ‘¢a divine spirit.” ‘The definite article is 
 wanting in the Hebrew in both cases. Mr 
 Quarry however conceives that the distinction 
 lies in the fact that Jehovah is a proper name, 
 while Elohim is an appellative. But there is 
 certainly no fair ground to infer any differ- 
 ence of meaning from the general use of the 
 twe phrases in the sacred text. It is the spirit 
 of Elohim who inspires Balaam (Num. xxiv. 
 2), Azariah, the son of Oded (2 Chro. xv. 1), 
 and Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada (2 Chro, 
 xxiv. 20), in their prophetic utterances; while 
 it is the Spirit of Jehovah who inspires the 
 Judges for their work as leaders of the people. 
 (Judg. iii. ro, vi. 34, x1. 29.) ‘The Spirit of 
 Jehovah who inspired Saul (1 S. x. 6) is the 
 same as is more frequently called the Spirit 
 of Elohim (1 S. x. ro, xi. 6, &c.). The terms 
 would thus seem to be strictly equivalent, 
 
 wisdom] ‘The Hebrew word is derived from 
 
 EXODUS aX Raa 
 
 [v. 38—6. 
 3 And I have filled him with the 
 
 spirit of God, in wisdom, and in un- 
 derstanding, and in knowledge, and in 
 all manner of workmanship, 
 
 4 To devise cunning works, to work 
 in gold, and in silver, and in brass, 
 
 5 And in cutting of stones, to set 
 them, and in carving of timber, to 
 work in all manner of workmanship. 
 
 6 And I, behold, I have given with 
 him Aholiab, the son of Ahisamach, 
 of the tribe of Dan: and in the hearts 
 of all that are wise hearted I have put 
 
 a root of which the meaning is to judge or 
 decide, Itis used to denote the proper endow-= 
 ment of the ruler (2 S. xiv. 20; Is. xix. 11), 
 and that. of the prophet (Ezek. xxviii. 3, 43 
 Dan, v.11); the highest exercise of the mind in 
 a general sense (Job ix. 4, xi. 6, Xil. 12, Xv. 8), 
 and, as in this place, the prime qualification of 
 the workman in any manner of work. (Exod. 
 XXVIll, 3, XXXl. 6, XXXV. 10, 46,00 g0s comes 
 XXXvi. 1, 2, &c.) It is, in fact, that “might 
 judgment in all things” for which we specially 
 pray on Whitsun-day. LXX. codia; Vulg. 
 Sapientia, 
 
 understanding| ‘The Hebrew word is from 
 a root that signifies to discern, or discriminate; 
 it denotes the perceptive faculty. LXX. ov- 
 veois; Vulg. intelligentia. 
 
 knowledge| i.e, experience, a practical ac- 
 quaintance with facts, LXX. émiorjpun; 
 Vulg. scientia, 
 
 in all manner of workmanship] i.e, not only 
 in the intellectual gifts of wisdom, under- 
 standing and knowledge, but in dexterity of 
 hand. 
 
 4. to devise cunning works| Rather, to de- 
 vise works of skill. The Hebrew phrase is 
 not the same as that rendered ‘‘cunning work” 
 in respect to textile fabrics in xxvi. 1. 
 
 4—6. There appears to be sufficient reason 
 to identify Hur, the grandfather of Bezaleel, 
 with the Hur who assisted Aaron in support- 
 ing the hands of Moses during the battle with 
 Amalek at Rephidim (Ex. xvii. 10), and who 
 was associated with Aaron in the charge of 
 the people while Moses was on the mountain 
 (Ex. xxiv. 14). Josephus says that he was 
 the husband of Miriam (‘ Ant.’ Ill. 2.§43 VI. 
 § 1). It is thus probable that Bezaleel was 
 related to Moses. He was the chief artificer 
 in metal, stone and wood; he had also to per- 
 form the apothecary’s work in the composi- 
 tion of the Anointing Oil and the Incense 
 (xxxvii. 29). He had precedence of all the 
 artificers, but Aholiab appears to have had 
 the entire charge of the textile work (xxxv, 
 35, XXXVill, 23). ; 
 
+ Heb. 
 vessels. 
 
 Vv. 7—I5.] 
 
 wisdom, that they may make all that 
 I have commanded thee; 
 
 7 The tabernacle of the congre- 
 gation, and the ark of the testimony, 
 and the mercy seat that zs thereupon, 
 and all the ‘furniture of the tabernacle, 
 
 8 And the table and his furniture, 
 and the pure candlestick with all his 
 furniture, and the altar of incense, 
 
 g And the altar of burnt offering 
 with all his furniture, and the laver 
 and his foot, 
 
 10 And the cloths of service, and 
 the holy garments for Aaron the 
 priest, and the garments of his sons, 
 to minister in the priest’s office, 
 
 Ir And the anointing oil, and 
 sweet incense for the holy place: ac- 
 
 6. all that are wise hearted| See on 
 XXVill, 3. 
 
 7. tabernacle| Tent, in both places, 
 
 of the congregation| of meeting. 
 
 8. the table and his furniture] xxv. 23—30. 
 
 the pure candlestick| ‘That is, the candle- 
 stick of pure gold; xxv. 31—40. 
 
 the altar of incense] XXX. I—Io. 
 
 9. the altar of burnt offering] xxvii, I—8. 
 the laver| xxX, 17—21, 
 
 10. And the cloths of service] Rather, 
 Ana the garments of office; that is, the 
 distinguishing official garments of the High- 
 priest. LXX. orodai Aerrovpyixai. With 
 this agree, more or less clearly, the Syriac, 
 Vulg., Targums, Saadia, Luther, Cranmer, 
 both the Geneva Versions, de Wette, Zunz, 
 Knobel, Kalisch, &c. ‘The three kinds of 
 dress mentioned in this verse appear to be 
 the only ones which were peculiar to the 
 Sanctuary. They were: (1) The richly 
 adorned state robes of the High-priest (see 
 XXVill. 6—38, xxxix, 1'Sq.). (2) The “holy 
 garments” of white linen for the High-priest, 
 worn on the most solemn occasion in the year 
 (see Lev. xvi. 4; Ex. xxviii. 39). (3) The gar- 
 ments of white linen for all the priests, worn 
 in their regular ministrations (see xxviii. 
 40, 41).—From the connection in which 
 the expression rendered ‘cloths of service” 
 here occurs, and a comparison of this verse 
 with xxxix. 1, it seems strange that any doubt 
 should have arisen as to its meaning. But 
 some Jewish writers have supposed that the 
 wrapping cloths are denoted which are men- 
 tioned Num. iv. 6, 7, 11, &c., and our trans- 
 lators appear to have held some similar notion. 
 Gesenius imagined that the inner curtains of 
 the Tabernacle are meant. But neither of 
 
 Bos. OE Usa, XA XT, 
 
 cording to all that I have commanded 
 thee shall they do. 
 
 12 4 And the Lorp spake unto 
 Moses, saying, 
 
 13 Speak thou also unto the chil- 
 dren of Israel, saying, Verily my 
 sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a 
 sign between me and you through- 
 out your generations; that ye may 
 know that I am the Lorp that doth 
 sanctify you. 
 
 14 *’Ye shall keep the sabbath ; chap. 2. 
 therefore; for it zs holy unto you: Deut. s. 
 every one that defileth it shall surely hate 
 
 be put to death: for whosoever doeth ** 
 any work therein, that soul shall be 
 cut off from among his people. 
 
 I5 Six days may work be done; 
 
 these interpretations appears to be supported 
 by a single ancient authority, nor can either 
 of them be well reconciled with the expres- 
 sion, ‘‘to do service in the holy place” (xxxv. 
 10, ZKKIX. 1, 41). CE xXxvint, 35) 
 
 The Penal Law of the Sabbath. 
 To——17, (Xxxv. 2, 7-) 
 
 In the Fourth Commandment the injunc- 
 tion to observe the Seventh Day is addressed 
 to the conscience of the people (see on xx. 8): 
 in this place, the object is to declare an infrac- 
 tion of the Commandment to be a capital 
 offence. ‘The two passages stand in a rela- 
 tion to each other similar to that between 
 Lev, xviii. xix. and Lev. xx. See note on 
 Lev. xviii. 24.—Considering the weighty 
 bearing of the Sabbath upon the Covenant 
 between Jehovah and His people, a solemn 
 sanction of its observance might well form the 
 conclusion of the string of messages which 
 Moses was to deliver on this occasion, . But 
 from the repetition of the substance of these 
 verses in the beginning of ch. xxxv. it seems 
 likely (as many commentators have observed) 
 that the penal edict was specially introduced 
 as a caution in reference to the construction 
 of the Tabernacle, lest the people, in their 
 zeal to carry on the work, should be tempted 
 to break the divine Law for the observance of 
 the Day. In this chapter, the edict imme- 
 diately follows the series of directions given 
 to Moses on Sinai for the work; in ch, xxxv. 
 Moses utters it before he repeats any of the 
 directions to the people. 
 
 13. a sign between me and you, &c.] Cf. 
 v, 17; Ezek, xx. 12, 20. See on Exod. xx, 8. 
 
 14. put to death} This Law was very 
 soon put into operation in the case of the 
 man who gathered sticks upon the Sabbath- 
 
 CCcy, 
 
 403 
 
404 
 
 +t Heb. 
 holiness. 
 
 | 
 
 ¢ Gen. I. 
 aio gece 
 
 but in the seventh zs the sabbath of 
 rest, ‘holy to the Lorp: whosoever 
 doeth any work in the sabbath day, 
 he shall surely be put to death. 
 
 16 Wherefore the children of Israel 
 shall keep the sabbath, to observe the 
 sabbath throughout their generations, 
 for a perpetual covenant. 
 
 17 It zs a sign between me and 
 the children of Israel for ever: for °zu 
 six days the Lorp made heaven and 
 earth, and on the seventh day he 
 rested, and was refreshed. 
 
 18 @ And he gave unto Moses, 
 when he had made an end of com- 
 muning with him upon mount Sinai, 
 
 2. 
 
 day. Death was inflicted by stoning. Num. 
 XVe 35- 
 
 cut off from among his people| ‘This is dis- 
 tinctly assigned as a reason why the offender 
 should, or might, be put to death. ‘The pas- 
 sage seems to indicate the distinction between 
 the meaning of the two expressions, to be cut 
 off from the people, and to be put to death, He 
 who was cut off from the people had, by his 
 offence, put himself out of the terms of the 
 Covenant, and was an outlaw, (See on Lev. 
 XVilil. 29.) On such, and on such alone, when 
 the offence was one which affected the well- 
 being of the nation, as it was in this case, 
 death could be inflicted by the public authority. 
 
 17. was refreshed| Literally, he took 
 breath, Cf. xxili, 12; 2 S, xvi. 14. The ap- 
 plication of the word to the Creator, which 
 occurs nowhere else, is remarkable. 
 
 18. ‘The directions for the construction of 
 the Sanctuary and its furniture being ended, 
 the Tables of Stone which represented the 
 Covenant between Jehovah and His people, 
 and. which, when covered with the Mercy- 
 seat were to give the Sanctuary its significance, 
 are now delivered to Moses in accordance 
 with the promise xxiv. 12; cf. xxxil. 15, 16. 
 
 The history of what relates to the con- 
 struction of the Sanctuary is here interrupted, 
 and is taken up again chap. xxxv. I. 
 
 CHAP. XX XIX XXIV, 
 
 THE GOLDEN CALF. THE COVENANT 
 AND THE ‘TABLES BROKEN AND RE-= 
 NEWED., 
 
 ‘The exact coherence of the narrative of all 
 that immediately relates to the construction 
 of the Sanctuary, if we pass on immediately 
 from ch, xxxi. to ch. xxxv., might suggest 
 the probability that these three chapters ori- 
 ginally formed a distinct composition, ‘This 
 suggestion is in some degree strengthened, if 
 we take account of some part of the subject 
 
 EXODUS! ON eck 
 
 XXXII. [v. 16—1. 
 
 4two tables of testimony, tables of ¢ Deut 
 
 stone, written with the finger of God. 
 CHAPTER XXXII. 
 
 t The people, in the absence of Moses, cause 
 Aaron to make a calf. 7 God is angered 
 thereby. 11 At the intreaty of Moses he ts 
 appeased. 1% Moses cometh down with the 
 tables. 19 He breaketh them. 20 He de- 
 stroyeth the calf. 22 Aaron’s excuse for 
 himself. 25 Moses causeth the idolaters to be 
 slain. 30 He prayeth for the people. 
 
 ND when the people saw that 
 Moses delayed to come down 
 
 out of the mount, the people gathered 
 themselves together unto Aaron, and 
 
 said unto him, “Up, make us gods, ¢ Acts 7. 
 
 which shall go before us; for as for *” 
 
 matter of ch. xxxiv. (see on xxxiv. I12—27). 
 But this need not involve the question of the 
 Mosaic authorship of the three chapters, The 
 main incidents recorded in them follow in 
 due order of time, and are therefore in their 
 proper place as regards historical sequence, 
 
 The Golden Calf, xxxii, 1I—6. 
 
 The people had, to a great extent, lost the 
 patriarchal faith, and were but imperfectly in- 
 structed in the reality of a personal unseen 
 God. Being disappointed at the long absence 
 of Moses, they seem to have imagined that he 
 had deluded them and had probably been de- 
 stroyed amidst the thunders of the mountain 
 (xxiv. 15—18). They accordingly gave way 
 to their superstitious fears and fell back upon 
 that form of idolatry that was most familiar 
 to them (see on v. 4). The narrative of the 
 circumstances is more briefly given by Moses 
 at a later period in one of his addresses 
 to the people (Deut. ix. 8—21, 25—29, x. 
 1—5, 8—11). It is worthy of remark that 
 Josephus, in his very characteristic chapter on 
 the giving of the Law (‘ Ant.’ Ill, 5), says 
 nothing whatever of this act of apostasy, 
 though he relates that Moses twice ascended 
 the mountain, and renews his own profession 
 that he is faithfully following the authority 
 of the Holy Scriptures, Philo speaks of the 
 calf as an imitation of the idolatry of Egypt, 
 but he takes no notice of Aaron’s share in the 
 sin (‘ Vit, Mos,’ III. 19. 37). 
 
 1. unto Aaron| The chief authority dur- 
 ing the absence of Moses was committed to 
 Aaron and Hur (xxiv. 14). 
 
 make us gods| ‘The substantive (e/ohim) 
 is plural in form and may denote gods. But 
 according to the Hebrew idiom, the meaning 
 need not be plural, and hence the word is 
 used as the common designation of the true 
 God (Gen. i. 1, &c. See on xxi, 6), It here 
 denotes a god, and should be so rendered 
 
 : 
 i 
 
BAODUS. XXX. 
 
 calf: and they said, These be thy 
 gods, O Israel, which brought thee 
 up out of the land of Egypt. 
 
 5 And when Aaron saw it, he built 
 an altar before it; and Aaron made 
 proclamation, and said, To morrow 
 is a feast to the Lorn. 
 
 6 And they rose up early on the 
 morrow, and offered burnt offerings, 
 and brought peace offerings; and the 
 ‘people sat down to eat and to drink, ¢: Cor. 10, 
 and rose up to play. a 
 
 7 4 And the Lorp said unto Mo- i ae 
 
 eut. 9. 
 
 v. 2—7.| 405 
 this Moses, the man that brought us 
 up out of the land of Egypt, we wot 
 not what is become of him. 
 
 2, And Aaron said unto them, Break 
 off the golden earrings, which are in 
 the ears of your wives, of your sons, 
 and of your daughters, and bring them 
 unto me. 
 
 3 And all the people brake off the 
 golden earrings which were in their 
 ears, and brought them unto Aaron. 
 
 4 *And he received them at their 
 hand, and fashioned it with a graving 
 tool, after he had made it a molten 
 
 ® Psal. 106, 
 
 (Saadia and most modern interpreters). It is 
 evident that what the Israelites asked for was 
 a visible god, Our version follows the LXX., 
 Vulg., &c. 
 
 2. Break off the golden earrings] It has 
 been very generally held from early times, 
 that Aaron did not willingly lend himself to 
 the mad design of the multitude; but that, 
 when overcome by their importunity, he ask- 
 ed them to give up such possessions as he 
 knew they would not willingly part with, in 
 the hope of putting a check on them (Augus- 
 tin. ‘Quest,’ 141; Theodoret. ‘ Quest,’ 66), 
 Assuming this to have been his purpose, he 
 took a wrong measure of their fanaticism, for 
 all the people made the sacrifice at once (v. 
 
 His weakness, in any case, was un- 
 pardonable and called for the intercession of 
 Moses (Deut. ix. 20). According to a Jewish 
 tradition found in the later Targums, Aaron 
 was terrified by seeing Hur, his colleague in 
 authority (xxiv. 14), slain by the people be- 
 cause he had ventured to oppose them. 
 
 4. And he received...a molten calf] The 
 Hebrew is somewhat difficult, ‘The follow- 
 ing rendering represents the sense approved 
 by most modern critics;—and he received the 
 gold at their hand and collected it in a bag and 
 made it a molten calf (Bochart, Gesenius, 
 Rosenmiiller, Fiirst, Knobel, Kurtz, &c, with 
 the later Targums). Our version is supported 
 by the LXX., Onkelos, Luther, de Wette, 
 Keil, &c. Other interpreters conceive the latter 
 part of the passage to mean that Aaron shaped 
 the gold ina mould (or, after a pattern) and 
 made it a molten calf (Saadia, Syriac, Vulgate, 
 Aben-Ezra, Michaelis, Zunz, Herx., &c.). 
 
 a molten calf| The word calf may mean 
 a yearling ox. ‘The Israelites must have 
 been familiar with the ox-worship of the 
 Egyptians; perhaps many of them had wit- 
 nessed the rites of Mnevis at Heliopolis, 
 almost on the borders of the Land of Goshen, 
 _ and they could not have been unacquainted 
 with the more famous rites of Apis at Mem- 
 phis. It is expressly said that they yielded 
 
 ses, “Go, get thee down; for thy ,,, 
 
 to the idolatry of Egypt while they were in 
 bondage (Josh, xxiv. 14; Ezek. xx. 8, xxiii. 
 3, 8). The earliest Jewish tradition derives 
 the golden calf from an Egyptian origin (Philo, 
 ‘Vit. Mos,’ 111. 19). It seems most likely 
 that the idolatrous tendency of the people had 
 been contracted from the Egyptians, but that 
 it was qualified by what they still retained 
 of the truths revealed to their forefathers, In 
 the next verse, Aaron appears to speak of the 
 calf as if it was a representative of Jehovah— 
 ‘« To-morrow is a feast to the Lorp.” They 
 did not, it should be noted, worship a living 
 Mnevis, or Apis, having a proper name, but 
 only the golden type of the animal. The 
 mystical notions connected with the ox by 
 the Egyptian priests may have possessed their 
 minds, and, when expressed in this modified 
 and less gross manner, may have been applied 
 to the Lorp, who had really delivered them 
 out of the hand of the Egyptians. Their 
 sin then lay, not in their adopting ano- 
 ther god, but in their pretending to worship 
 a visible symbol of Him whom no symbol 
 could represent. The close connection be- 
 tween the calves of Jeroboam and this calf is 
 shewn by the repetition of the formula, 
 ‘‘which brought thee up out of the land of 
 Egypt” (1 Kings xii. 28). 
 
 These be thy gods| This is thy god. See 
 on v, I. 
 
 5. a feast tothe Lorp| See on wv. 4. 
 
 6. See 1 Cor, x. 7). Hengstenberg, Kurtz 
 and others have laid a stress upon the simi- 
 larity of what is briefly described in the words, 
 ‘‘the people sat down to eat and drink, and 
 rose up to play,” to certain rites of the Egyp- 
 tians spoken of by Herodotus (11, 60, II. 27). 
 But such orgies were too common amongst 
 ancient idolaters for the remark to be of 
 much worth, 
 
 The trial of Moses as a Mediator, 
 i aren 
 The faithfulness of Moses in the office that 
 had been entrusted to him was now to be put 
 
406 
 
 ¢ Deut. 9g. 
 8. 
 
 people, which thou broughtest out of 
 the land of Egypt, have corrupted 
 themselves: 
 
 8 © They have turned aside quickly 
 out of the way which I commanded 
 them: they have made them a mol- 
 ten calf, and have worshipped it, and 
 have sacrificed thereunto, and said, 
 These be thy gods, O Israel, which 
 have brought thee up out of the land 
 of Egypt. 
 
 g And the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 
 / chap. 33-7] have seen this people, and, behold, 
 
 Deut. 9. it 7s a stiffnecked people: 
 
 i 10 Now therefore let me alone, that 
 my wrath may wax hot against them, 
 and that I may consume them: and I 
 will make of thee a great nation. 
 
 £Psal.106. yt And Moses besought | the 
 
 tHeb. _ Lorp his God, and said, Lorp, why 
 
 Per doth thy wrath wax hot against thy 
 
 to the test. It was to be made manifest whe- 
 ther he loved his own glory better than he loved 
 the brethren who were under his charge; 
 whether he would prefer that he should him- 
 self become the founder of a ‘‘ great nation,” 
 or that the Lorp’s promise should be fulfil- 
 led in the whole people of Israel. As in the 
 trial of Abraham, the object to be attained was 
 not that He who knows the hearts of all men 
 might be assured that the servant whom He 
 had chosen was true and stedfast, but that 
 the faith of the servant might be strengthened 
 and instructed, by its being made known to 
 him what power had been given to him to 
 resist temptation. ‘This may have been espe- 
 cially needful for Moses, in consequence of 
 his natural disposition, See Num, xii. 3; cf. 
 Ex, ili, 11. With this trial of Moses may 
 be compared the third temptation which the 
 evil one was permitted to set before our Sa- 
 viour. Matt, iv. 8—ro. 
 
 Moses was tried in a twofold manner. ‘The 
 trial was at first based on the divine commu- 
 nication made to him in the mount respecting 
 the apostasy of the people: on this occasion, 
 he rejects the offer of glory for himself and 
 intercedes for the nation; the exercise was 
 a purely spiritual one, apart from visible 
 fact, and no answer is given to his interces- 
 sion (see on v, 14). But in the second case, 
 stirred up as he was by the facts actually be- 
 fore his eyes, after he had unflinchingly car- 
 ried out the judgment of God upon the per- 
 sons of the obstinate idolaters, he not only 
 again intercedes for the nation, but declares 
 himself ready to sacrifice his own salvation 
 for them (v, 32). It is thus that the hearts 
 
 FEO ce ERE 
 
 [v. 8—14. 
 
 people, which thou hast brought forth 
 out of the land of Egypt with great 
 power, and with a mighty hand? 
 
 12 *Wherefore should the Egyp- % Numb. 
 
 $ . np td. T3e 
 tians speak, and say, For mischief 
 
 did he bring them out, to slay them 
 in the mountains, and to consume 
 them from the face of the earth? 
 Turn from thy fierce wrath, and re- 
 pent of this evil against thy people. 
 13 Remember Abraham, Isaac, and 
 Israel, thy servants, to whom thou 
 swarest by thine own self, and saidst 
 
 unto them, ?I will multiply your seed ¢ Gen. 12. 
 
 as the stars of heaven, and all this & 48. 
 land that I have spoken of will I give 
 unto your seed, and they shall inherit 
 it for ever. 
 
 14 And the Lorp repented of the 
 evil which he thought to do unto his 
 people. 
 
 of God’s saints in all ages are strengthened 
 beforehand, by inward struggles that are wit- 
 nessed by no human eye, to fight the battle 
 when outward trials come upon them.—If 
 the wonderful narrative in this passage should 
 appear to any thoughtful reader incoherent 
 or obscure, let him read it again and again 
 and apply to it the key of his own spiritual 
 experience, 
 
 On another occasion in the history, when 
 the people had rebelled on account of the re- 
 port of the ten spies, the trial of Moses’ 
 faithfulness was repeated in a very similar 
 manner (Num, xiv, 11—23). 
 
 8. These be thy gods...have brought| This 
 is thy god, O Israel, who has brought— 
 
 10. Jet me alone} But Moses did not let 
 the Lorp alone; he wrestled, as Jacob had 
 done, until, like Jacob, he obtained the bless- 
 ing (Gen. xxxii. 24). 
 
 12. repent ofthis evil] See on v, 14. 
 
 13. See Gen. xv. 5, 18, XK 37, Xxx 22h 
 
 14. ‘This states the fact that was not re- 
 vealed to Moses till after his second interces- 
 sion when he had come down from the 
 mountain and witnessed the sin of the people 
 (vv. 30—34). He was then assured that the 
 Lord’s love to His ancient people would pre- 
 vail. God is said, in the language of Scrip- 
 ture, to repent, when his forgiving love is 
 seen by man to blot out the letter of His 
 judgments against sin (2 Sam, xxiv. 16; Joel 
 li. 133; Jonah ili, ro, &c.); or when the sin 
 of man seems to human sight to have disap- 
 pointed the purposes of grace (Gen. vi. 6; 
 1 Sam. xv. 35, &c.). As they exist in the 
 
aes) EXODUS; XXXIE 
 
 407 
 ground i¢ to powder, and strawed it 
 upon the water, and made the children 
 of Israel drink of it. 
 
 21 And Moses said unto Aaron, 
 What did this people unto thee, that 
 thou hast brought so great a sin upon 
 them? | 
 
 22, And Aaron said, Let not the 
 anger of my lord wax hot: thou 
 knowest the people, that they are set 
 on mischief. 
 
 23 For they said unto me, Make 
 us gods, which shall go before us: for 
 as for this Moses, the man that brought 
 us up out of the land of Egypt, we 
 wot not what is become of him. 
 
 15 @ And Moses turned, and went 
 down from the mount, and the two 
 tables of the testimony were in his 
 hand: the tables were written on both 
 their sides; on the one side and on 
 the other were they written. 
 
 16 And the “tables were the work 
 of God, and the writing was the writ- 
 ing of God, graven upon the tables. 
 
 17 And when Joshua heard the 
 noise of the people as they shouted, 
 he said unto Moses, There is a noise 
 of war in the camp. 
 
 18 And he said, /t 7; not the voice 
 of them that shout for mastery, neither 
 is it the voice of them that cry for 
 
 ® chap. 31. 
 18, 
 
 tHebd. being overcome: but the noise of them 24 And I said unto them, Whoso- 
 weakness. : : 
 that sing do I hear. ever hath any gold, let them break it 
 19 { And it came to pass, as soon off. So they gave :¢ me: then I cast | 
 as he came nigh unto the camp, that it into the fire, and there came out oS) 
 he saw the calf, and the dancing: and __ this calf. 
 Moses’ anger waxed hot, and he cast 25 4 And when Moses saw that 
 the tables out of his hands, and brake the people were naked; (for Aaron 
 | them beneath the mount. had made them naked unto theirtHeb. 
 ‘Deut.9. 20 “And he took the calf which they shame among ‘their enemies:) rose ip 
 : agains 
 
 had made, and burnt /¢ in the fire, and 26 Then Moses stood in the gate Zor, 
 
 Eternal Father, wrath and love are essentially 
 ONE, however they may appear to thwart 
 each other to carnal eyes. The awakened 
 conscience is said to repent, when, having felt 
 its sin, it feels also the divine forgiveness: it 
 is at this crisis that God, according to the 
 language of Scripture, repents towards the 
 sinner. ‘Thus the repentance of God made 
 known in and through the One true Media- 
 tor reciprocates the repentance of the return- 
 ing sinner, and reveals to him Atonement, 
 
 17, 18. Moses does not tell Joshua of the 
 divine communication that had been made to 
 him respecting the apostasy of the people, but 
 only corrects his impression by calling his 
 attention to the kind of noise which they are 
 making, _ 
 
 19. Though Moses had been prepared 
 by the revelation on the Mount, his righteous 
 indignation was stirred up beyond control 
 when the abomination was before his eyes. 
 
 20. We need not suppose that each in- 
 cident is here placed in strict order of time. 
 What is related in this verse must have occu- 
 pied some time and may have followed the 
 rebuke of Aaron. Moses appears to have 
 thrown the calf into the fire to destroy its 
 form and then to have pounded, or filed, the 
 metal to powder, which he cast into the 
 brook (Deut. ix. 21). He then made the 
 Israelites drink of the water of the brook, 
 
 The act was of course asymbolical one. The 
 idol was brought to nothing and the people 
 were made to swallow their own sin (cf. 
 Mic. vii. 13, 14). It seems idle to speculate, 
 as many interpreters have done (Rosen- 
 miiller, Davidson, Kurtz, &c.), on the means 
 by which the comminution of the gold was 
 effected. 
 
 21. Moses, in grave irony, asks Aaron 
 whether the people had offended him in any 
 way to induce him to inflict such an injury 
 
 on them as to yield to their request. 
 
 22. my lord| ‘The deference here shown 
 to Moses by Aaron should be noticed. His 
 reference to the character of the people, and 
 his manner of stating what he had done 
 (v. 24), are very characteristic of the depre- 
 cating language of a weak mind. 
 
 23. Make us gods} Make us a god, 
 
 25. naked| Rather, unruly, or /icentious. 
 So the LXX., Onk., Syriac, and nearly all 
 critical authorities, 
 
 shame among their enemies| Cf. Ps. xliv. 13 
 Deut. xxviii. 37; Ps, xxix. 4. 
 
 26—29.] ‘The Tribe of Levi, Moses’ own 
 Tribe, now distinguished itself by immediately 
 returning to its allegiance and obeying the 
 call to fight on the side of Jehovah, We 
 need not doubt that the 3000 who were slain 
 were those who persisted in resisting Moses : 
 we may perhaps conjecture that they were 
 
of the camp, and said, Who 7s on the 
 Lorn’s side? let him come unto me. 
 And all the sons of Levi gathered 
 themselves together unto him. 
 
 27 And he said unto them, Thus 
 saith the Lorp God of Israel, Put 
 every man his sword by his side, and 
 go in and out from gate to gate 
 throughout the camp, and slay every 
 man his brother, and every man his 
 companion, and every man his neigh- 
 
 lOr, And b 
 , our. 
 
 Moses 2 ee 
 said, Con 28 And the children of Levi did 
 secrateé . 
 yourselves according to the word of Moses: and 
 ‘ie Lorn, there fell of the people that day about 
 Pe . three thousand men. 
 
 hathbeen 29 "For Moses had said, *Conse- 
 against _ 
 
 his son, Crate yourselves to day to the Lorp, 
 and ye Ve every man upon his son, and 
 dus bro- upon his brother; that he may be- 
 
 her, PC a ; 
 
 {Heb. stow upon you a blessing this day. 
 Fill your 
 
 hands. 
 
 30 {1 And it came to pass on the 
 
 such as contumaciously refused to drink of 
 the water of the brook (v.20). The spirit of 
 the narrative forbids us to conceive that the 
 act of the Levites was anything like an indis- 
 criminate massacre. An amnesty had first 
 been offered to all in the words, ‘* Who is on 
 the Lorp’s side?” ‘Those who were forward 
 to draw the sword were directed not to spare 
 their closest relations or friends; but this 
 must plainly have been with an understood 
 qualification as regards the conduct of those 
 who were to be slain. Had it not been so, 
 they who were on the Lorp’s side would 
 have had to destroy each other. We need 
 not stumble at the bold, simple way in which 
 the statement is made. The Bible does not 
 deign to apologise for itself; and hence at 
 times it affords occasion to gainsayers, who 
 shut their eyes to the spirit while they are 
 captiously looking at dissevered fragments of 
 the letter. 
 
 29. Consecrate yourselves to day to the 
 Lorp| ‘The margin contains the literal ren- 
 dering. Our version gives the most probable 
 meaning of the Hebrew (see Ley, viii. 22, 27), 
 and is supported by the best authority. The 
 Levites were to prove themselves in a special 
 way the servants of Jehovah, in anticipation 
 of their formal consecration as ministers of 
 the Sanctuary, by manifesting a self-sacrificing 
 zeal in carrying out the divine command, 
 even upon their nearest relatives (cf. Deut. 
 x. 8). Kurtz, adopting the rendering of the 
 ‘Targums, supposes that what the Levites 
 were commanded to do was to offer sacri- 
 
 EXODUSAAKAAL 
 
 lv. 27—34. 
 
 morrow, that Moses said unto the 
 people, Ye have sinned a great sin: 
 and now I will go up unto the Lorp; 
 peradventure I shall make an atone- 
 ment for your sin. 
 
 31 And Moses returned unto the 
 Lorp, and said, Oh, this people have 
 sinned a great sin, and have made 
 them gods of gold. 
 
 32 Yet now, if thou wilt forgive 
 their sin—; and if not, blot me, I 
 pray thee, out of thy book which thou 
 hast written. 
 
 33 And the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 Whosoever hath sinned against me, 
 him will I blot out of my book. 
 
 34. Therefore now go, lead the 
 people unto the place of which I have 
 spoken unto thee: behold, mine Angel 
 shall go before thee: nevertheless in 
 the day when I visit I will visit their 
 sin upon them. 
 
 fices upon the Altar to expiate the blood 
 which they were directed to shed. But this 
 interpretation cannot be well reconciled with 
 the Hebrew, and it is hard to imagine that 
 expiation could be required for what was 
 done in direct obedience to the command of 
 the Lorp, It may be added that the Sin- 
 offering, the only kind of sacrifice that would 
 be suitable on such a hypothesis, had not yet 
 been instituted. 
 
 31. returned unto the Lorp] i.e. he again 
 ascended the Mount. 
 
 gods of gold) a god of gold, 
 
 32. Fora similar form of expression, in 
 which the conclusion is left to be supplied by 
 the mind of the reader, see Dan. iii. 15 ; Luke 
 xlil, 9, xix. 423; John vi. 62; Rom, ix.22.— 
 For the same thought, see Rom. ix. 3. It is 
 for such as Moses and St Paul to realize, and 
 to dare to utter, their readiness to be wholly 
 sacrificed for the sake of those whom God has 
 entrusted to their love. This expresses the 
 perfected idea of the whole Burnt-offering, 
 
 thy book] ‘The figure is taken from the 
 enrolment of the names of citizens. ‘This is 
 its first occurrence in the Scriptures. See 
 Ps, Ixix. 28; Isa. iv. 3; Dan. xii, 1; Luke x, 
 20; Phil. iv. 3; Rev. iti. 5, &c. 
 
 33, 34. Each offender was to suffer for 
 his own sin, On xx. 5 cf, Ezek. xviii. 4, 20. 
 Moses was not to be taken at his word. He 
 was to fulfil his appointed mission of leading 
 on the people towards the Land of Promise. 
 
 34. mine Angel shall go before thee] See 
 On XXiil. 20, and xxxiii. 3. 
 
Vv. 35—3-] 
 
 35 And the Lorp plagued the 
 people, because they made the calf, 
 which Aaron made. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIII. 
 
 ' The Lord refuseth to go as he had promised 
 with the people. 4 The people murmur there- 
 at. 7 The tabernacle is removed out of the 
 camp. 9 The Lord talketh familiarly with 
 Moses. 12 Moses desireth to see the glory of 
 God. 
 
 ca D the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 Depart, and go up hence, thou 
 and the people which thou hast brought 
 up out of the land of Egypt, unto the 
 
 =. 
 
 in the day when I visit, &c.| ‘This has been 
 supposed to refer to the sentence that was 
 pronounced on the generation of Israelites 
 then living, when they murmured on account 
 of the report of the ten spies, that they should 
 not enter the land (Num. xiv.). On that oc- 
 casion they were charged with having tempt- 
 ed God “these ten times” (wv. 22). But 
 though the Lorn visited the sin upon those 
 who rebelled, yet He ‘‘ repented of the evil 
 which He thought to do unto His people.” 
 He chastised the individuals, but did not take 
 His blessing from the nation, 
 
 35. and the Lorp| Thus Jehovah. 
 
 CHAP. X XXIII, 
 
 The Conference between Jehovah and His 
 mediator is continued in this Chapter. It 
 had been conceded to Moses that the nation 
 should not be destroyed (see xxxii. ro sq_), and 
 that he should lead them on towards the place 
 of which the Lorp had spoken (see xxxii. 34). 
 But the favour was not to be awarded accord- 
 ing to the terms of the original promise (xxiil. 
 20—23). ‘The Covenant on which the pro- 
 mise was based had been broken by the people. 
 Jehovah now therefore declared that though 
 His Angel should go before Moses (xxxii. 34) 
 and should drive out the heathen from the 
 land, He would withhold His own favouring 
 presence, Jest he should consume them in the 
 qway (XXxili. 2, 3). Thus were the people 
 forcibly warned that His presence could prove 
 a blessing to them only on condition of their 
 keeping their part of the covenant (see on v, 3). 
 If they failed in this, His presence would be to 
 them ‘‘a consuming fire” (Deut. iv. 24). The 
 people, when they heard the Divine message, 
 mourned and humbled themselves, stripping 
 off their accustomed ornaments in accordance 
 with the command (vv, 4—6). Moses now 
 appointed a religious service of a peculiar 
 kind, dedicating a Tent pitched at some dis- 
 tance from the camp, as a meeting-place for 
 Jehovah and himself (vv. 7—11). Here he 
 again intercedes with persevering fervour until 
 
 EXODUS. MIT MORETTI. 
 
 land which I sware unto Abraham, to 
 
 Isaac, and to Jacob, saying, Bint? Gow 12, 
 
 thy seed will I give it: 
 
 2, And I will send an angel before * Deut. 7. 
 thee; and I will drive out the Ca- Jia, 24. 
 
 naanite, the Amorite, and the Hittite, 7 
 and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the 
 Jebusite : 
 
 3 Unto a land flowing with milk 
 and honey: for I will not go up in 
 
 the midst of thee; for thou art a © stiff- ¢ chap. 32. 
 necked people: lest I consume thee fut, o, 
 
 in the way. 13. 
 
 he obtains the answer, ‘‘ My presence shall go 
 with thee, and I will give thee rest” (wv. 14; 
 see note), He then dares to reason on this 
 answer and to prove its necessity, as one man 
 might discuss terms with another (v. 11). 
 ‘The answer is at last given in a still clearer 
 and more gracious form: ‘I will do this 
 thing also that thou hast spoken: for thou 
 hast found grace in my sight, and I know 
 thee by name” (v.17). Having proved him- 
 self worthy of his calling as a mediator, both 
 in vindicating the honour of Jehovah and in 
 his self-sacrificing intercession with Jehovah 
 for the nation, he is rewarded by a special 
 vision of the Divine nature: Jehovah reveals 
 Himself to him in His essential character to 
 the utmost point that such revelation is pos- 
 sible to a finite being (wv, 18—23). 
 
 2, See on iii. 8. 
 
 3. milk and honey| See on iii. 8. 
 
 for I will not go up in the midst of thee] 
 This is the awful qualification with which the 
 possession of the promised Land might have 
 been granted: Jehovah Himself was not to go 
 before the people. According to the Targums, 
 it was the shekinah that was to be withheld 
 (see on xiv. 19, 20). Hengstenberg supposes 
 that the Angel promised in xxili. 20—23 was 
 ‘‘the Angel of Jehovah,” xar éfoynv, the 
 Second Person of the Trinity, in whom Jeho- 
 vah was essentially present, the same whom 
 Isaiah called ‘‘the Angel of His presence” 
 (Ixiii. 9) and Malachi, ‘‘the Angel of the 
 Covenant” (iii. 1); but that the Angel here 
 mentioned was an ordinary Angel, one com- 
 missioned for this service out of the heavenly 
 host (Christology, Vol. I. p. 107). It should 
 however be noted that this Angel is expressly 
 spoken of as the Angel of Jehovah in xxxil. 34. 
 But in whatever way we understand the 
 mention of the Angel in this passage as com- 
 pared with xxiii. 20, the meaning of the threat 
 appears to be that the nation should be put on 
 a level with other nations, to lose its cha- 
 racter as the people in special covenant with 
 Jehovah (see on v. 16).—On the name Angel 
 
 409 
 
410 
 
 4 4 And when the people heard 
 these evil tidings, they mourned : and 
 no man did put on him his orna- 
 ments. 
 
 5 For the Lorp had said unto 
 Moses, Say unto the children of Israel, 
 Ye are a stiffnecked people: I will 
 come up into the midst of thee in a 
 moment, and consume thee: therefore 
 now put off thy ornaments from thee, 
 that I may know what to do unto 
 
 thee. 
 6 And the children of Israel stripped 
 themselves of their ornaments by the 
 
 mount Horeb. 
 7 And Moses took the tabernacle, 
 
 of Jehovah, see on Gen. ii. 1, Hengstenberg’s 
 arguments have been elaborately answered by 
 Kurtz, ‘Hist of O, C. Vol. 1. § 50 (2), and 
 Vol, 111. § 14 (3). 
 
 lest I consume thee in the way| See introd, 
 note to this chap. St Augustine speaks of the 
 mystery that Jehovah should declare Himself 
 to be less merciful than His Angel (Quest. 
 150). It would seem that the presence of 
 Jehovah represented the Covenant with its 
 penalties as well as its privileges, See pre- 
 ceding note. 
 
 4—6. See introd. note. 
 
 5. I will come up...consume thee] By far 
 the greater number of versions put this con- 
 ditionally; If I were to go up for one 
 moment in the midst of thee, I should 
 consume thee (see v. 3). ‘This rendering 
 seems best to suit the context. Our trans- 
 lators follow the earlier English versions, 
 which are supported by the Syriac, Vulg. 
 and Luther. 
 
 that I may know, &c.| and I shall 
 know dy that what to do unto thee, 
 That is, by that sign of their repentance Je- 
 hovah would decide in what way they were 
 to be punished, 
 
 6. by the mount Horeb| from mount 
 Horeb onwards. ‘The meaning, according to 
 all the best authorities, appears to be that 
 they ceased to wear their ornaments from the 
 time they were at Mount Horeb. 
 
 The Temporary Tent of Meeting. 
 7—Il. 
 
 7. the tabernacle] ‘The original word sig- 
 nifies the Tent. ‘The only word in the Old 
 Testament which ought to be rendered taber- 
 nacle (mishkan) does not occur once in this 
 narrative (see on xxvi. 1), What is here called 
 The Tent has been understood in three dif- 
 ferent ways. It has been taken to denote: 
 
 BOSOND WSs xk xe IG 
 
 [v. 4—9, 
 
 and pitched it without the camp, afar 
 off from the camp, and called it the 
 Tabernacle of the congregation. And 
 it came to pass, that every one which 
 sought the Lorp went out unto the 
 tabernacle of the congregation, which 
 was without the camp. 
 
 8 And it came to pass, when Moses 
 went out unto the tabernacle, that all 
 the people rose up, and stood every 
 man a¢ his tent door, and looked after 
 Moses, until he was gone into the 
 tabernacle. 
 
 g And it came to pass, as Moses 
 entered into the tabernacle, the cloudy 
 pillar descended, and stood at the door 
 
 1. ‘The Tabernacle constructed according 
 to the pattern showed to Moses in the Mount 
 (our version and the earlier English ones, se- 
 veral Jewish authorities, Knobel, &c.). But 
 if we are in any degree to respect the order of 
 the narrative, the Tabernacle was not made 
 until after the events here recorded (see 
 x1, 2), 
 
 2. An old sanctuary, or sacred tent, 
 which the Israelites had previously possessed 
 (Michaelis, Rosenmiiller, &c.), But it is in- 
 credible that such a structure should not have 
 been spoken of elsewhere, had it existed. 
 
 3. A tent appointed for this temporary 
 purpose by Moses, very probably the one in 
 which he was aecustomed to dwell. Accord- 
 ing to the Hebrew idiom, the article may 
 stand for the possessive pronoun, and thus it 
 is most likely that the right rendering is, Azs 
 tent. ‘This is by far the most satisfactory 
 interpretation (LXX., Syriac, Jarchi, Aben- 
 Ezra, Drusius, Grotius, Geneva French, 
 Kurtz, Wogue, &c.). 
 
 pitched it without the camp, afar off from the 
 camp| ‘This tent was to be a place for meet- 
 ing with Jehovah, like the Tabernacle which 
 was about to be constructed. But in order 
 that the people might feel that they had for- 
 feited the Divine presence (see xxv, 8), the 
 Tent of meeting (as it should be called, 
 see ON Xxvil. 21, and Note at the end of Chap. 
 xl.) was placed ‘‘afar off from the camp,” and 
 the Mediator and his faithful servant Joshua 
 were alone admitted to it (v. rr). 
 
 8. the tabernacle] the Tent. 
 
 at his tent door| at the entrance of his 
 tent (see on xxvi. 36). The people may 
 have stood up either out of respect to Moses, 
 or from doubt as to what was going to occur. 
 But as soon as the cloudy pillar was seen, 
 they joined in worship (v. ro). 
 
 9. as Moses entered...talked with Moses] 
 
 ‘‘As Moses entered into the Tent, the cloudy — 
 
v. 10—18.] 
 
 of the tabernacle, and the Loxp talked 
 with Moses. 
 
 10 And all the people saw the cloudy 
 pillar stand at the tabernacle door: 
 and all the people rose up and wor- 
 shipped, every man iz his tent door. 
 
 11 And the Lorp spake unto Moses 
 face to face, as a man speaketh unto 
 his friend. And he turned again into 
 the camp: but his servant Joshua, the 
 son of Nun, a young man, departed 
 not out of the tabernacle. 
 
 12 { And Moses said unto the 
 Lorp, See, thou sayest unto me, Bring 
 up this people: and thou hast not let 
 me know whom thou wilt send with 
 me. Yet thou hast said, I know thee 
 by name, and thou hast also found 
 grace in my sight. 
 
 13 Now therefore, I pray thee, if 
 I have found grace in thy sight, shew 
 me now thy way, that I may know 
 
 pillar came down and stood at the 
 entrance of the Tent and talked with 
 Moses” (LXX.., Vulg., Onk., de Wette, 
 Knobel, &c.). The Cloudy pillar is the proper 
 nominative to the verb talked (cf. xiii. 21, xix. 
 g, Xxiv. 16, xl. 35). 
 
 10. the tabernacle door| the entrance 
 of the Tent. 
 
 rose up and worshipped] or, began to wor- 
 ship. The people by this act gave another 
 proof of their penitence. 
 in bis tent door| at the entrance of his 
 tent. 
 
 11. face to face] The meaning of these 
 words is limited by v. 20, see note; cf. also 
 Num. xii. 8; Deut. iv, 12. 
 
 oshua| See on xvil. 9. 
 
 the tabernacle] the Tent, 
 
 The Mediator is rewarded. 
 12—I3. 
 
 12. let me know whom thou wilt send with 
 me| Jehovah had just previously commanded 
 Moses to lead on the people and had promised 
 to send an Angel before him (v. 2, Xxxil. 34), 
 Moses was now anxious to know who the 
 Angel was to be. 
 
 I know thee by name] The Lorp had called 
 him by his name, iti. 4; cf. Isa. y AS pe ib eh 
 
 found grace] Xxxii. 10, &c. 
 
 13. thy way] He desires not to be left in 
 uncertainty, but to be assured, by Jehovah's 
 mode of proceeding, of the reality of the pro- 
 mises that had been made to him, 
 
 14.] Ewald considers that this verse should 
 
 BOD So os SPL, 
 
 thee, that I may find grace in thy 
 sight: and consider that this nation 
 is thy people. 
 
 14 And he said, My presence shall 
 go with thee, and 1 will give thee 
 rest. 
 
 15 And he said unto him, If thy 
 presence go not with me, carry us not 
 up hence. 
 
 16 For wherein shall it be known 
 here that I and thy people have found 
 grace in thy sight? zs zt not in that 
 thou goest with us? so shall we be 
 separated, I and thy people, from all 
 the people that are upon the face of the 
 earth. 
 
 17 And the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 I will do this thing also that thou hast 
 spoken: for thou hast found grace in 
 my sight, and I know thee by name. 
 
 18 And he said, I beseech thee, 
 shew me thy glory. 
 
 be read interrogatively, ‘‘ Must my presence 
 go with thee, and shall I give thee rest?” 
 This rendering may make the connection 
 more simple; but it appears to be supported 
 by no other authority. See on xxxiv. 9. 
 
 rest] This was the common expression 
 for the possession of the promised Land. 
 Deut! ii. -2G?s foshs Lyra; rs) xan. 4,5 
 Ch, FIeDe iV.’ oe 
 
 15, 16] Moses would have preferred that 
 the people should forego the possession of the 
 Land and remain in the wilderness, if they 
 were to be deprived of the presence of Jeho- 
 vah, as the witness for the Covenant, accord- 
 ing to the original promise. It was this which 
 alone distinguished (rather than ‘sepa- 
 rated”) them from other nations, and which 
 alone would render the Land of Promise a 
 home to be desired. 
 
 17. Cf. v.13. His petition for the na- 
 tion, and his own claims as a mediator, are 
 now granted to the full. 
 
 18. shew me thy glory] ‘The faithful ser- 
 vant of Jehovah, now assured by the success 
 of his mediation, yearns, with the proper 
 tendency of a devout spirit, for a more inti- 
 mate communion with his Divine Master than 
 he had yet enjoyed. He seeks for something 
 surpassing all former revelations. He had 
 talked with the Lorp “face to face as a man 
 speaketh unto his friend” (wv. 11; cf. Deut, 
 xxxiv. 10), but it was in the Cloudy pillar: 
 he, and the people with him, had seen ‘‘ the 
 glory of the Lorn,” but it was in the form of 
 ‘‘ devouring fire” (xvi. 7. I0, XXIV. 16, 17); 
 
 AII 
 
4 
 
 12 EXODUS RR STI ee 
 
 1g And he said, I will make all 
 my goodness pass before thee, and I 
 will proclaim the name of the Lorp 
 before thee; “and will be gracious to 
 whom I will be gracious, and will shew 
 mercy on whom I will shew mercy. 
 
 20 And he said, Thou canst not see 
 my face: for there shall no man see 
 me, and live. 
 
 21 And the Lorp said, Behold, 
 there is a place by me, and thou shalt 
 stand upon a rock: 
 
 22 And it shall come to pass, while 
 my glory passeth by, that I will put 
 thee in a clift of the rock, and will 
 cover thee with my hand while I pass 
 by: 
 
 he had even beheld the ‘‘ similitude” of the 
 LorD in a mystical sense (Num. xii. 8). But 
 he asks now to behold the face of Jehovah 
 in all its essential glory, neither veiled by a 
 cloud nor represented by an Angel. 
 
 19, 20] But his request could not be 
 granted in accordance with the conditions of 
 human existence. ‘The glory of the Almighty 
 in its fulness is not to be revealed to the eye 
 of man. A further revelation of the Divine 
 goodness was however possible. Jehovah was 
 to reveal Himself as the gracious One, whose 
 mercy in forgiving iniquity included, and 
 brought into harmony, all the claims of jus- 
 tice (xxxiv. 6, 7; see on xxxil.14). The pro- 
 mise here given was to be fulfilled on the 
 morrow, when the mediator was to receive 
 the twofold reward of his spiritual wrestling ; 
 the covenant was to be renewed with the na- 
 tion according to its original terms, and he 
 himself was to be permitted to penetrate 
 more deeply into the mysteries of the Divine 
 nature than had ever before been granted to 
 mortal man. 
 
 It was vouchsafed to St Paul, as it had 
 been to Moses, to have special ‘‘ visions and 
 revelations of the Lord” (2 Cor. xii. 1—4). 
 He was ‘‘caught up into the third heaven” 
 and heard ‘‘ unspeakable words which it is 
 not possible for a man to utter.” But he 
 had, also like Moses, to find the narrow reach 
 of the intellect of man in the region of God- 
 head, It was long after he had heard the 
 unspeakable words in Paradise that he spoke 
 of the Lord as dwelling ‘in the light which 
 no man can approach unto, whom no man 
 hath seen nor can see” (1 Tim. vi. 16). He 
 knew of the Mediator greater than Moses 
 (Heb. iii. 5, 6), who being ‘in the bosom of 
 the Father” had declared Him in a higher 
 sense than He had been declared to Moses, 
 but still it remains true that ‘‘ no man hath 
 
 [v. I9—2. 
 
 23 And I will take away mine hand, 
 and thou shalt see my back parts: but 
 my face shall not be seen. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIV. 
 
 The tables are renewed. 5 The name of the 
 LORD proclaimed. 8 Moses intreateth God 
 to go with them. 10 God maketh a covenant 
 with them, repeating certain duties of the first 
 table. 28 Moses after forty days in the mount 
 cometh down with the tables. 29 His face 
 Shineth, and he covereth it with a vail. 
 
 ND the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 
 Lan 
 
 «Hew thee two tables of stone Deut 
 
 like unto the first: and I will write” 
 upon these tables the words that were 
 in the first tables, which thou brakest. 
 2 And be ready in the morning, 
 and come up in the morning unto 
 
 seen God at any time” (John i. 18). How- 
 ever intimate may be our communion with 
 the Holy One, we are still, as long as we are 
 in the flesh, ‘‘ to see through a glass darkly,” 
 waiting for the time when we shall see, with 
 no figure of speech, ‘face to face” (xz Cor. 
 xii, 12). Then we know ‘that we shali be 
 like him, for we shall see him as he is” (1 John 
 iil. 2). It was in a tone of aspiration lower 
 than that of Moses or St Paul, that St Philip 
 said, ‘‘ Lord, shew us the Father” (John xiv. 8). 
 
 19. will be gracious to whom I will be 
 gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will 
 shew mercy| Jehovah declares His own will 
 to be the ground of the grace which He is 
 going to shew the nation. St Paul applies 
 these words to the election of Jacob in order 
 to overthrow the self-righteous boasting of 
 the Jews (Rom. ix. 15). 
 
 20. Cf. xix. 21. Such passages as this 
 being clearly in accordance with what we 
 know of the relation of spiritual existence to 
 the human senses, shew how we are to inter- 
 pret the expressions ‘‘ face to face” (wv. 11), 
 ‘‘mouth to mouth” (Num. xii. 8), and others 
 of the like kind. See especially xxiv. 10, 11; 
 Isa. vi. 1; and cf. John xiv. 9. 
 
 21—23.] The conjectures and traditions 
 on the place of this vision, inconclusive as 
 they must be, are given by Robinson, ‘ Bib. 
 Res.’ Vol. I. p. 153. , 
 
 CHAP. XXXIV. 
 
 The Covenant and the Tables are renewed—The 
 second revelation of the Divine Name ta 
 Moses. 
 
 I—Io. 
 1. Hew thee] See v. 4. The former tables 
 
 are called ‘the work of God,” xxxii. 16. 
 
 the words that were in the first tables, 
 which thou brakest| ‘These were ‘‘the words 
 
POLE SrA ROOT. 
 
 6 And the Lorp passed by before 
 him, and proclaimed, ‘The Lorn, The 
 Lorp God, merciful and gracious, 
 longsuffering, and abundant in good- 
 ness and truth, 
 
 7 Keeping mercy for thousands, 
 forgiving iniquity and transgression 
 and sin, and that will by no means 
 clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity « chap. 20. 
 of the fathers upon the children, and Seut. s, o, 
 upon the children’s children, unto the Jer 32-18. 
 
 v. 3—9. | 
 
 mount Sinai, and present thyself there 
 to me in the top of the mount. 
 
 3 And no man shall ’come up with 
 thee, neither let any man be seen 
 throughout all the mount; neither let 
 the flocks nor herds feed before that 
 mount. 
 
 4 4 And he hewed two tables of. 
 stone like unto the first; and Moses 
 rose up early in the morning, and went 
 up unto mount Sinai, as the Lorp had 
 
 chap. 19. 
 2. 
 
 commanded him, and took in his hand 
 the two tables of stone. 
 
 5 And the Lorn descended in the 
 cloud, and stood with him there, and 
 proclaimed the name of the Lorn. 
 
 of the covenant, the ten commandments” (w. 
 eer eeeerseut. IV. 13, IX. 10, 11, X. I, 4, and 
 especially Deut. v. 6—22. ‘These passages 
 would seem to leave no room for doubt that 
 what we recognize as the Ten Command- 
 ments were inscribed on the second as well 
 as the first pair of Tables. But Géthe, in 
 one of his early works, started the notion 
 that what was written on these Tables was 
 the string of precepts, which may be reckoned 
 as ‘Ten, contained in this chap. vv. 12—26. 
 Falsely regarding the Mosaic Covenant as 
 essentially narrow and exclusive, he could 
 not see how an expression of universal moral- 
 ity like the Ten Commandments of Ex. xx. 
 could possibly have formed its basis. Hitzig 
 has taken a similar view. Hengstenberg (‘Pent.’ 
 Vol. 11. p. 31) and Kurtz (‘Old Cov.’ 111. 182) 
 have answered Hitzig at length.—Ewald holds 
 that the Tables mentioned in this verse con- 
 tained the original Ten Commandments, but 
 that the tables spoken of in v. 28 were dis- 
 tinct ones, on which Moses engraved this 
 string of precepts. But this seems an utterly 
 gratuitous supposition. 
 
 3. These are similar to the instructions 
 given on the first occasion. See xix. 12, 13. 
 
 6, 7. ‘This was the second revelation of 
 the name of the God of Israel to Moses. ‘The 
 first revelation was of Jehovah as the self- 
 existent One, who purposed to deliver His 
 people with a mighty hand (iii. 14); this was 
 of the same Jehovah as a loving Saviour who 
 was now forgiving their sins. ‘The two ideas 
 that mark these revelations are found com- 
 bined, apart from their historical develop- 
 ment, in the Second Commandment, where 
 the Divine unity is shewn on its practical 
 side, in its relation to human obligations (cf. 
 xxxiv. 14). Both in the Commandment and 
 in this passage, the Divine Love is associated 
 with the Divine Justice; but in the former 
 there is a transposition to serve the proper 
 
 third and to the fourth generation. 
 
 8 And Moses made haste, and 
 bowed his head toward the earth, and 
 worshipped. 
 
 g And he said, If now I have found 
 
 purpose of the Commandments, and_ the 
 Justice stands before the Love. This is 
 strictly the legal arrangement, brought out 
 in the completed system of the ceremonial 
 Law, in which the Sin-offering, in acknow- 
 ledgment of the sentence of Justice against 
 sin, was offered before the Burnt-offering 
 and the Peace-offering (see pref. to Leviticus). 
 But in this place the truth appears in its 
 essential order; the retributive Justice ot 
 Jehovah is subordinated to, rather it is made 
 a part of, His forgiving Love (see on xxxii. 
 14). ‘The visitation of God, whatever form 
 it may wear, is in all ages working out pur- 
 poses of Love towards all His children. ‘The 
 diverse aspects of the Divine nature, to sepa- 
 rate which is the tendency of the unre- 
 generate mind of man and of all heathenism, 
 are united in perfect harmony in the Lord 
 Jehovah, of whom the saying is true in all 
 its length and breadth, ‘‘God is love” (1 Joh. 
 iv. 8). It was the sense of this in the degree 
 to which it was now revealed to him that 
 
 caused Moses to bow his head and worship 
 
 (v. 8). But the perfect revelation of the 
 harmony was reserved for the fulness of time 
 when ‘‘the Lamb slain from the foundation 
 of the world” was made known to us in 
 the flesh as both our Saviour and our Judge. 
 —Moses quotes the words here pronounced 
 to him in his supplication after the rebellion 
 that arose from the report of the ten spies 
 (Num. xiv. 18). 
 
 9. Moses had been assured of the pardon 
 of the people and the perfect restoration of the 
 Covenant (xxxiii. 14, 17): he had just had re- 
 vealed to him, in a most distinguished man- 
 ner, the riches of the Divine forgiveness. Yet 
 now, in the earnest travail of his spirit, he 
 supplicates for a repetition of the promise, add-. 
 ing the emphatic petition, that Jehovah would 
 take Israel for his own inheritance (ch. xv, 
 17). This yearning struggle after assurance 
 
414 
 
 2 Deut. 5. 
 
 2. 
 
 © chap. 23. 
 
 t Heb. 
 statues. 
 
 grace in thy sight, O Lord, let my 
 Lord, I pray thee, go among us; for 
 it 7s a stiffnecked people; and pardon 
 our iniquity and our sin, and take us 
 for thine inheritance. 
 
 10 ™ And he said, Behold, 7I 
 make a covenant: before all thy peo- 
 ple I will do marvels, such as have 
 not been done in all the earth, nor in 
 any nation: and all the people among 
 which thou art shall see the work of 
 the Lorn: for it zs a terrible thing 
 that I will do with thee. 
 
 1r Observe thou that which I 
 command thee this day: behold, I 
 drive out before thee the Amorite, 
 and the Canaanite, and the Hittite, 
 and the Perizzite, and the Hivite, 
 and the Jebusite. 
 
 12 ¢ T’ake heed to thyself, lest thou 
 . make a covenant with the inhabitants 
 
 of the land whither thou goest, lest 
 it be for a snare in the midst of thee: 
 13 But ye shall destroy their altars, 
 break their ‘images, and cut down 
 their groves: 
 14 For thou shalt worship no other 
 god: for the Lorp, whose name is 
 
 chap. 20. Jealous, zs a* jealous God. 
 5: 
 
 Lest thou make a covenant 
 
 ‘2 
 
 is like the often-repeated utterance of the 
 heart, when it receives a blessing beyond its 
 hopes, ‘‘can this be real?” ‘These words of 
 Moses wonderfully commend themselves to 
 the experience of the prayerful spirits of all 
 ages,—A hint may perhaps be gathered from 
 this verse in favour of reading the verbs in 
 XXXill. 14 (see note) affirmatively rather than 
 interrogatively. 
 
 10. marvels] ‘These marvels are explained 
 in the following verse. Cf. Deut. vii. 1, &c. 
 
 Conditions of the Covenant. 
 1I—27. 
 
 11. ‘The names of the nations are the same 
 as occur in the first promise to Moses in 
 il. 8. 
 
 12—27. ‘The precepts contained in these 
 verses are, for the most part, identical in sub- 
 stance with some of those which follow the 
 Ten Commandments and are recorded in ‘the 
 Book of the Covenant” (xx.—xxiii.; see 
 xxiv. 7). Such a selection of precepts in this 
 place, connected with the account of the re- 
 stored Covenant and the new Tables, may 
 tend to support the probability that chapters 
 
 EXODU S, xe. 
 
 [v. 1o—21. 
 
 with the inhabitants of the Jand, and 
 they go a whoring after their gods, and 
 do sacrifice unto their gods, and one 
 call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice ; 
 
 16 And thou take of £ their daugh-* 1 King 
 ters unto thy sons, and their daugh- ~~ 
 ters go a whoring after their gods, 
 and make thy sons go a whoring after 
 their gods. 
 
 17 ‘hou shalt make thee no mol- 
 ten gods. 
 
 18 4 The feast of *unleavened * chap. 2 
 bread shalt thou keep. Seven days * 
 thou shalt eat unleavened bread, as I 
 commanded thee, in the time of the 
 month Abib: for in the * month Abib ¢ chap. ~ 
 thou camest out from Egypt. 
 
 1g * All that openeth the matrix is # chap. 2 
 mine; and every firstling among thy Evck a 
 cattle, whether ox or sheep, that is male. > 
 
 20 But the firstling of an ass thou 
 shalt redeem with a "lamb: and if! 0r, 4# 
 thou redeem 47m not, then shalt thou 
 break his neck. All the firstborn of 
 thy sons thou shalt redeem. And 
 none shall appear before me “empty. {SP ? 
 
 21 4 ”Six days thou shalt work, * chapip 
 but on the seventh day thou shalt Deut. s. 
 rest: in earing time and in harvest Tire 13 
 thou shalt rest. Ae 
 
 \ 
 
 XXXil., XXXlil,, XXxiv. Originally formed a dis- 
 tinct composition, See introd. note to xxxii, 
 12. See on xxiii, 32, 33. 
 
 13. See on xxiii. 24. 
 
 cut down their groves| See Note at the end 
 of the Chap. 
 
 14. See on xx. 5. 
 
 15, 16] An expansion of v. 12 (cf, Deut. 
 xxxil. 16). The unfaithfulness of the nation 
 to its Covenant with Jehovah is here for the 
 first time spoken of as a breach of the mar- 
 riage bond, ‘The metaphor is, in any case, 
 a natural one, but it seems to gain point, if we 
 suppose it to convey an allusion to the abo- 
 minations connected with heathen worship, 
 such as are spoken of Num. xxv. 1—3, Cf 
 Lev. xvil. 7, xx. 5, 6; Num. xiv. 33. 
 
 15. eat of his sacrifice} See Num. xxv, 2. 
 
 17. molten] See on xx. 4, 
 
 18.) See XxHL. «Fs. 
 
 19. See on xtil. 2, 12 and Ley. xxvii. 26. 
 
 20. See xiii. 13. 
 
 shall appear before me empty] See xxiii. 15. 
 
 21. See xx, 9, xxili. 12. There is here 
 added to the Commandment a particular cau- 
 
Vv. 22—32.| 
 
 22 4 *And thou shalt observe the 
 
 feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of 
 wheat harvest, and the feast of in- 
 biel gathering at the ' year’s end. 
 evens 23 4 ° Thrice in the year shall all 
 bern *3 your men children appear before the 
 eut. 6. Jord Gop, the God of Israel. 
 i 24 For I will cast out the nations 
 before thee, and enlarge thy bor- 
 ders: neither shall any man desire 
 thy land, when thou shalt go up to 
 appear before the Lorp thy God 
 thrice in the year. 
 
 25 2 Thou shalt not offer the blood 
 of my sacrifice with leaven; neither 
 shall the sacrifice of the feast of the 
 
 _passover be left unto the morning. 
 
 26 The first of the firstfruits of 
 thy land thou shalt bring unto the 
 house of the Lorp thy God. ‘Thou 
 
 chap. 23. Shalt not seethe a ’kid in his mo- 
 cut. x4. ther’s milk. 
 
 5 27 And the Lorp said unto Moses, 
 Deut. 4. Write thou *these words: for after 
 . the tenor of these words I have made 
 a covenant with thee and with Israel. 
 
 hap. 23. 
 i 
 
 ry 
 
 chap. 23. 
 
 tion respecting those times of year when the 
 land calls for most labour.—The old verb 
 to ear (i.e. to plough) is genuine English. 
 Though it appears to be cognate with the 
 Latin arare, it is certainly not derived from 
 it. The English verb is found Gen. xlv. 6, 
 in Shakespeare (‘ Rich. II.’ 111, 2; ‘ Ant. and 
 Cleo.’ I, 4), and elsewhere. 
 
 22. See xxiii. 16. 
 
 23. See xxiii, 14, 17. 
 
 24, for I will cast out) See xxiii, 23. 
 
 enlarge thy borders| See xxii. 31; Deut. 
 Xli, 20. 
 
 neither shall any man desire, &c.| ‘This is 
 the only place in which the promise is given 
 to encourage such as might fear the conse- 
 quences of obeying the Divine Law in attend- 
 ing to their religious duties. But cf. xxiii. 27. 
 
 25, 26.] See xxiii. 18, 19. 
 
 27. Write thou| Moses is here com- 
 manded to make a record in his own writing 
 of the preceding precepts (see on vv. 12—27). 
 The Book of the Covenant was written in 
 like manner (xxiv. 4, 7).—On the words ‘he 
 wrote,” in the next verse, see note. 
 
 Moses receives the New Tables, comes down 
 from the Mount, and converses with the 
 
 people. 
 28—35. 
 mien Ct, XXIV, 18, 
 
 BRODUSHX AME, 
 
 415 
 
 28 *And he was there with the Bane oi 
 Lorp forty days and forty nights; Deut. 9. 9. 
 he did neither eat bread, nor drink 
 water. And he wrote upon the tables 
 the words of the covenant, the ten 
 * commandments. Bes 
 
 29 {1 And it came to pass, when 
 Moses came down from mount Sinai 
 with the two tables of testimony in 
 Moses’ hand, when he came down 
 from the mount, that Moses wist not 
 that the skin of his face shone while 
 he talked with him. 
 
 30 And when Aaron and all the 
 children of Israel saw Moses, behold, 
 the skin of his face shone; and they 
 were afraid to come nigh him. 
 
 31 And Moses called unto them; 
 and Aaron and all the rulers of the 
 congregation returned unto him: and 
 Moses talked with them. 
 
 32 And afterward all the children of 
 Israel came nigh: and he gave them 
 in commandment all that the Lorp 
 had spoken with him in mount 
 Sinai. 
 
 he wrote] According to Hebrew usage, 
 the name of Jehovah may be the subject of 
 the verb; that it must be so, is evident from 
 vr. Cfo xxxii, 16, 
 
 29. the two tables of testimony] Cf. xxxi, 
 18. 
 the skin of his face shone| Cf. Matt. xvii. 2. 
 The brightness of the Eternal Glory, though 
 Moses had witnessed it only in a modified 
 manner (Xxxlij. 22, 23), was so reflected in 
 his face, that Aaron and the people were 
 stricken with awe and feared to approach 
 him until he gave them words of encourage- 
 ment. The Hebrew verb aran, to shine, is 
 connected through a simple metaphor with 
 keren, a horn; and hence Aquila and the 
 Vulgate have rendered the verb to be horned. 
 The latter part of the verse in the Vulg. is, 
 et ignorabat quod cornuta esset facies sua ex 
 consortio sermonis Domini. From this use of 
 the word cornuta has arisen the popular repre- 
 sentation of Moses with horns on his fore- 
 head. 
 
 33—35. St Paul refers to this passage as 
 shewing forth the glory of the Law, though 
 it was but a ‘‘ministration of condemnation,” 
 and was to be done away, in order to enhance 
 the glory of the Gospel, ‘‘the ministration 
 of the spirit,” which is concealed by no vail 
 from the eyes of believers, and is to last for 
 ever (2 Cor. iii. 7—15). 
 
416 
 
 2 Cor. 3. 
 a5 
 
 33 And #/] Moses had done speak- 
 ing with them, he put “a vail on his 
 face. 
 
 34. But when Moses went in be- 
 fore the Lorp to speak with him, he 
 took the vail off, until he came out. 
 And he came out, and spake unto 
 
 33. And till Moses had done| Our translators 
 give what may seem to be the easiest sense of 
 the original by supplying the word z//, But 
 the Hebrew rather requires that when, not 
 till, should be inserted; and this agrees better 
 with vw, 35 (so the LXX., Vulg., the Tar- 
 gums, Syriac, Saadia, and nearly all modern 
 versions, not excepting Luther and Cranmer), 
 If we adopt this rendering, Moses did not 
 wear the vail when -he was speaking to the 
 people, but when he was silent. See on v. 35. 
 
 34. Moses went in| i.e. to the Tent of 
 meeting. 
 
 35. Our version accords with the Hebrew 
 and all the ancient versions, except the Vul- 
 gate, which has this remarkable rendering, for 
 
 EXODUS: 
 
 € 
 | 
 : 
 [ ‘a 
 
 NOG [v. 33—35. 
 
 the children of Israel that which he 
 was commanded. 
 
 35 And the children of Israel saw 
 the face of Moses, that the skin of 
 Moses’ face shone: and Moses put 
 the vail upon his face again, until he 
 went in to speak with him. 
 
 which it is difficult to account unless we may 
 suppose it to represent a different reading in 
 the original :—videbant faciem egredientis Moysi 
 esse cornutam ; sed operiebat ille rursus faciem 
 suam, siquando loquebatur ad eos. It has 
 been suggested that if we may imagine St 
 Paul to have had such a reading in his mind, 
 it would simplify the use he makes of the 
 passage in 2 Cor. ili, 12—15. But it is not 
 necessary to resort to any such supposition, 
 since St Paul’s application of the narrative 
 may be well explained as referring to the 
 simple fact that it was distinctive of the old 
 dispensation that a vail should conceal the 
 glory. ‘There was no occasion to notice the 
 particular that Moses did not wear the vail 
 just in the act of speaking. 
 
 NOTE on CHAP. XxXxIv. 13: 
 
 THE GROVES. 
 
 This is the first reference to what is com- 
 monly known as grove-worship. The original 
 word for grove in this connection is 718 
 (asherah), a different one, from that so ren- 
 dered in Gen, xxi, 33 Ow, eshel), Our 
 translators have followed the sense given in 
 most of the passages in which the word 
 occurs by the LXX., Vulg., and Saadia, and 
 which has been adopted by most Jewish 
 authorities, by Luther, and other modern 
 translators. It was supposed that what the 
 Law cemmands is the destruction of groves 
 dedicated to the worship of false deities. The 
 allusions to such groves in classical writers 
 are familiar enough. The connection of 
 sacred groves and trees with the worship of 
 the powers of nature may be traced very 
 generally amongst the ancient nations of Asia 
 and Europe (see Humboldt, ‘ Cosmos,’ Vol. 
 II. p. 95, Sabine’s translation). But there 
 appear to be insuperable difficulties in the 
 way of thus rendering asherah. Since the 
 times of Selden and Spencer most critics 
 have taken the word to denote either a per- 
 sonal goddess or some symbolical representa- 
 tion of one, 
 
 The following conclusions seem to be fairly 
 deduced from the references to the subject in 
 the Old Testament: 
 
 (1) According to the most probable deri- 
 
 vation of the name the ashérah represented 
 something that was upright, which was fixed, 
 or planted, in the ground; hence, if it was 
 not a tree, it must have been some sort of 
 upright pillar or monument. 
 
 (2) It was formed of wood, and when it 
 was destroyed it was cut down and burned 
 (Deut. vil. 5; Judg. Vi. 25, 26; tee etn 
 6, 15). It might be made of any sort of 
 wood. See note on Deut. xvi, 21. 
 
 (3) That it could not be a grove appears 
 from an asherah having been set up ‘‘ under 
 every green tree” in Judah in the time of 
 Rehoboam (x K. xiv. 23), and in Israel in 
 the time of Hoshea (2 K. xvii. 10); from an 
 asherah idol (not ‘‘an idol in a grove,” as it 
 stands in our version) having been destroyed 
 and burnt near the brook Kidron by Asa 
 (1 K, xv. 13; 2 Chr. xv. 16);)aneerroumes 
 carved image of the asherah having been set 
 up in the Temple by Manasseh (2 K. xxi. 7), 
 which was brought out by Josiah and burnt 
 and stamped to powder (2 K. xxiii. 6). 
 
 The worship of asherah is found associated 
 with that of Baal (Judg. iii. 7; 1 K. xviii. 19, 
 2K. xxi. 3; xxii, 4), like that of Astarte, or 
 Ashtoreth (NIMWY) (Judg. ii. 13, x. 6; 1S. 
 vil. 4). Hence it has been inferred by 
 de Wette and others that Asherah was ano- 
 ther name for Astarte. ‘This opinion might 
 seem to be countenanced by the LXX. in 
 
holiness. 
 
 Vv, i—11.] 
 
 2 Chron. xv. 16 (where the Vulgate has 
 Simulacrum Priapi), and by the Vulgate in 
 Judg. iii. 7. But it has been proved that the 
 words have no etymological connection with 
 each other, and are not likely to have had the 
 same denotation. Movers, resting his main 
 argument upon 2 K. xxiii. 13—15, con- 
 ceived them to be the names of two distinct 
 deities. On the whole, the most probable 
 result of the inquiry seems to be that while 
 Astarte was the personal name of the god- 
 dess, the asherah was a symbol of her, pro- 
 bably in some one of her characters, wrought 
 in wood in some conventional form. If we 
 suppose it to have symbolized her as a god- 
 dess of nature, the conjecture that its form 
 resembled that of the sacred tree’of the As- 
 Syrians, with which we have become familiar 
 from the monuments of Nineveh! (see Fer- 
 
 1 It has been conjectured from the sculptured 
 figures that this was an upright stock which was 
 adorned at festive seasons with boughs, flowers, 
 andribbons. Such might have been the ashérah. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXV. 
 
 1 The sabbath. 4 The free gifts for the taber- 
 nacle. 20 The readiness of the people to offer. 
 30 Bezalel and Aholiab are called to the 
 work. 
 
 ND Moses gathered all the con- 
 
 gregation of the children of Is- 
 
 rael together, and said unto them, 
 
 These are the words which the Lorp 
 
 hath commanded, that ye should do 
 
 them. 
 
 2. *Six days shall work be done, 
 
 . but on the seventh day there shall be 
 
 ‘to you ‘an holy day, a sabbath of rest 
 
 to the Lorp: whosoever doeth work 
 therein shall be put to death. 
 
 3 Yeshall kindle no fire throughout . 
 
 your habitations upon the sabbath day. 
 
 4 4 And Moses spake unto all the 
 congregation of the children of Israel, 
 saying, This zs the thing which the 
 Lorp commanded, saying, 
 
 CHAP. XXXV. The narrative of what 
 relates to the construction of the Sanctuary 
 is now resumed from xxxi. 18. 
 
 Moses delivers to the people the messages on the 
 
 supply of materials for the Sanctuary. 
 I—I9g. 
 1. Moses here addresses the whole people. 
 See xxv. 1; cf. on Lev. vill. 3. On. see 
 On XXXi. 12. 
 
 Vou. I. 
 
 BeODUS XX 
 
 gusson, ‘Nineveh and Persepolis,’ p. 299), 
 gains something in probability. 
 
 It has been supposed, on what seems to be 
 good ground, that the image, or rather 
 pillar (MAND, matzevab), spoken of here 
 and elsewhere in the same connection, was a 
 stone pillar, set up in honour of Baal, as the 
 Asherah was a wooden pillar, set up in honour 
 of, Astarte (1 K. xiv. 23; 2 K. xvii. 10, xviii. 
 4, &c.). But Gesenius rightly observes that 
 these monuments may have lost in later times 
 their original meaning as regards Baal and 
 Astarte, as the herme of the Greeks did in 
 regard to Hermes. ‘They probably became 
 connected with a debased and superstitious 
 worship of Jehovah, like the figure of the calf 
 (see on xxxli. 4). This perhaps explains the 
 need of the prohibition that an asherah should 
 be placed near the Altar of Jehovah. See 
 Deut. xvi. 21. (Selden, ‘de Diis Syr.’ p. 343 
 sq.; Spencer, ‘de Leg. Heb.’ lib. 11. c. xxvii. 
 §1; Gesenius, ‘Thes.’ and ‘ Handwéorterbuch,’ 
 s.v.; Fiirst, ‘ Lex.’ s. v.; Movers, ‘ Phénizier,’ 
 I. p. 560; Keil on x Kings xiv. 23.) 
 
 5 Take ye from among you an of- 
 
 fering unto the Lorp: ? whosoever 7s Age 25. 
 
 of a willing heart, let him bring it, an 
 offering of the Lorn; gold, and sil- 
 ver, and brass, 
 
 6 And blue, and purple, and scarlet, 
 and fine linen, and goats’ hair, 
 
 7 And rams’ skins dyed red, and 
 badgers’ skins, and shittim wood, 
 
 8 And oil for the light, and spices 
 for anointing oil, and for the sweet 
 incense, 
 
 g And onyx stones, and stones to 
 be set for the ephod, and for the 
 breastplate. 
 
 10 And every wise hearted among 
 you shall come, and make all that the 
 Lorp hath commanded ; 
 
 11 © The tabernacle, his tent, and ac 26. 
 
 his covering, his taches, and his boards, ; 
 his bars, his pillars, and his sockets, 
 
 3. This prohibition is here first distinctly 
 expressed, but it is implied xvi. 23. 
 10. wise hearted] See on xxviii. 3. 
 
 11. See on xxvi. r—37. It has been 
 already observed that in the instructions for 
 making the Sanctuary, the Ark of the Cove- 
 nant, as the principal thing belonging to it, 
 is mentioned first; but in the practical order 
 of the work, as it is here arranged, the 
 
 DD 
 
 417 
 
418 
 
 12 The ark, and the staves thereof, 
 with the mercy seat, and the vail of 
 the covering, 
 
 13 Ihe table, and his staves, and 
 all his vessels, and the shewbread, 
 
 14. The candlestick also for the 
 light, and his furniture, and his lamps, 
 with the oil for the light, 
 
 15 “And the incense altar, and his 
 staves, and the anointing oil, and the 
 sweet incense, and the hanging for 
 the door at the entering in of the 
 tabernacle, 
 
 16 ©The altar of burnt offering, 
 with his brasen grate, his staves, and 
 all his vessels, the laver and his foot, 
 
 17 ‘The hangings of the court, his 
 pillars, and their sockets, and the 
 hanging for the door of the court, 
 
 18 ‘Ihe pins of the tabernacle, and 
 the pins of the court, and their cords, 
 
 Ig The cloths of service, to do 
 service in the holy place, the holy 
 garments for Aaron the priest, and 
 the garments of his sons, to minister 
 in the priest’s office. 
 
 20 “1 And all the congregation of 
 
 Tabernacle with its Tent and covering come 
 first. See on xxv. 10—16. 
 
 12. Onthe Ark and the Mercy Seat, see 
 ON XXV. Io—22. 
 
 the vail of the covering| ‘The second He- 
 brew word is not the same as that in the 
 preceding verse, which is rendered covering, 
 and denotes the Covering of the Tent (see 
 on xxvi. 14): but it is the one used for the 
 entrance curtains (see on xxvi. 36, xxvii. 16). 
 ‘The same phrase occurs Ex. xxxv. 12, xl. 21; 
 Num, iv. 5. 
 
 13, 14. See on xxv. 23—38. 
 
 15. the incensealtar] See on xxx. I 
 
 the anointing oil] See on xxx. 22—33. 
 
 the sweet incense] See on xxx. 34—38. 
 
 the hanging for the door] the entrance 
 curtain. See on xxvi. 36, xxvii. 16. 
 
 16. the altar of burnt offering} See on 
 XXvVil. 1—8. 
 
 the laver| See on xxx. 18—21. 
 
 17. See on xxvii. 9—18. 
 
 18. ‘These were the tent-pins and cords 
 of the Tent of the Tabernacle and those of 
 the pillars of the Court. See Note at the end 
 of Ch, xxvi. ‘The word Tabernacle (mishkan) 
 is here used for the full name, the Taber- 
 nacle of the Tent of meeting (see xl. 2, 
 
 EXODUS, Ae 
 
 [v. 12—25,. 
 
 the children of Israel departed from 
 the presence of Moses. 
 
 21 And they came, every one whose 
 heart stirred: him up, and every one— 
 whom his spirit made willing, and’ 
 they brought the Lorp’s offering to 
 the work of the tabernacle of the con- 
 gregation, and for all his service, and 
 for the holy garments. 
 
 22 And they came, both men and 
 women, as many as were willing 
 hearted, and brought bracelets, and 
 earrings, and rings, and tablets, all 
 jewels of gold: and every man that 
 offered offered an offering of gold unto 
 the Lorp. 
 
 23 And every man, with whom 
 was found blue, and purple, and 
 scarlet, and fine linen, and goats’ hair, 
 and red skins of rams, and badgers’ 
 skins, brought them. 
 
 24 Every one that did offer an of- 
 fering of silver and brass brought the 
 Lorp’s offering: and every man, with 
 whom was found shittim wood for any 
 work of the service, brought zt. 
 
 25 And all the women that were 
 
 6, 29, note on xxvi. 1, &c.). It denotes the 
 
 entire structure. 
 
 19. the cloths of service to do service in 
 the holy place] Rather;—the garments of 
 office to do service in the Sanctuary, 
 &c, See on xxxi, 10, 
 
 21. See on xxv, 2. 
 
 22. bracelets} Rather, brooches. 
 
 earrings! The Hebrew word signifies a 
 ring, either for the nose (Prov. xi. 22; Isa, iii. 
 21) or for the ear (xxxii. 2; Gen. xxxv. 4; 
 Judg. viii. 24). That ear-rings, not nose- 
 rings, as some have imagined, are here meant 
 is confirmed by what we know of early He= 
 brew and Egyptian customs. See Gen, xxxv. 
 4; Wilkinson, ‘ Pop, Acc,’ I. p.145, Il. p. 338. 
 
 rings| signet rings. 
 
 tablets | 
 word denotes, Gesenius and others have taken 
 it for gold beads; but Fiirst, with more pro- 
 bability, for armlets, in accordance with 
 the Ancient Versions. It is most likely that 
 all the articles mentioned in this verse were of 
 gold. ‘The indulgence of private luxury was 
 thus given up for the honour of the Lorp. 
 Cf. xxxvill. 8, 
 
 23,24. See on xxv. 3, 4, 5. 
 25. See on xxv. 4. 
 
 It is not certain what the Hebrew - 
 
 iv 
 
v. 26—35.| EXODUS. XXXV, 
 
 wise hearted did spin with their hands, 
 and brought that which they had spun, 
 both of blue, and of purple, and of 
 scarlet, and of fine linen. 
 
 26 And all the women whose heart 
 stirred them up in wisdom spun goats’ 
 hair. 
 
 27 And the rulers brought onyx 
 stones, and stones to be set, for the 
 ephod, and for the breastplate ; 
 
 Zchap. 30. 2.8 And /spice, and oil for the light, 
 , and for the anointing oil, and for the 
 sweet incense. 
 
 29 The children of Israel brought 
 a willing offering unto the Lorp, 
 every man and woman, whose heart 
 made them willing to bring for all 
 manner of work, which the Lorp 
 had commanded to be made by the 
 hand of Moses. 
 
 30 4 And Moses said unto the 
 
 chap. 31. children of Israel, See, “the Lorp 
 : hath called by name Bezaleel the son 
 
 27. See on xxviii. g—20. The precious 
 stones and spices were contributed by the 
 rulers, who were more wealthy than the 
 other Israelites. 
 
 28. See on xxx. 22—38. 
 
 29. Cf.v.21. Observe the emphatic re- 
 petition. 
 
 oOo Ci, xxxi. 2, 
 
 Sie Gro XKxi. 3. 
 
 32. to devise curious works] to devise 
 works of skill. Cf. xxxi. 4. 
 
 33. to make any manner of cunning work] 
 to work in all manner of works of 
 skill. 
 
 34. ‘* And he hath put it into his heart 
 to teach, both into his heart and 
 into Aholiab’s,” &c.—They were qualified 
 by the Lord not only to work themselves, 
 but to instruct those who were under them. 
 
 35. of the engraver| of the artificer. 
 The branches of work committed to Bezaleel 
 are here included under the general term the 
 work of the artificer: they are distinct- 
 ly enumerated vv. 32, 33 and xxxi. 4, 5. But 
 what was under the charge of Aholiab is here 
 for the first time clearly distinguished into the 
 work of the skilled weaver, that of the 
 embroiderer, and that of the weaver. 
 
 the cunning workman] the skilled wea- 
 ver, literally, the reckoner. He might. have 
 been so called because he had nicely to count 
 and calculate the threads in weaving figures 
 in the manner of tapestry or carpet. His 
 work was chiefly used in the curtains and 
 
 of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of 
 Judah ; 
 
 31 And he hath filled him with the 
 spirit of God, in wisdom, in under- 
 standing, and in knowledge, and in all 
 manner of workmanship ; 
 
 32 And to devise curious works, to 
 work in gold, and in silver, and in brass, 
 
 33 And in the cutting of stones, 
 to set them, and in carving of wood, 
 to make any manner of cunning work. 
 
 34 And he hath put in his heart 
 that he may teach, doth he, and Aho- 
 liab, the son of Ahisamach, of the 
 tribe of Dan. 
 
 35 Them hath he filled with wis- 
 dom of heart, to work all manner of 
 work, of the engraver, and of the 
 cunning workman, and of the em- 
 broiderer, in blue, and in purple, in 
 scarlet, and in fine linen, and of the 
 weaver, even of them that do any work, 
 and of those that devise cunning work. 
 
 vail of the Tabernacle, in the Ephod and the 
 Breastplate (xxvi. 1, 31, XXvili. 6, 15, &c.). 
 It is generally called ‘‘ cunning work” in our 
 version, but the name is unfortunately not 
 restricted to it. 
 
 the embroiderer| He worked with a needle, 
 either shaping his design in stitches of colour- 
 ed thread, or in pieces of coloured cloth sewn 
 upon the groundwork. His work was em- 
 ployed in the entrance curtains of the 
 ‘Tent and the court, and in the girdle of the 
 High-priest (xxvi. 36, xxvii. 16, XXVill. 39).— 
 The Hebrew root rakam=to work with a 
 needle, has survived in Arabic, but is not 
 
 “found in Syriac, nor in the Targums. It is 
 
 a curious fact that through the Arabic have 
 come from the same Semitic root the Spanish 
 recamare and the Italian ricamare. 
 
 the weaver] He appears to have worked 
 in the loom in the ordinary way with mate- 
 rials of only a single colour, The tissues 
 made by him were used for the Robe of the 
 Ephod and its binding and for the coats of the 
 priests (xxviii, 32, Xxxix. 22, 27). The dis- 
 tinctions in the kinds of work mentioned in 
 this and the two preceding notes are clearly 
 expressed in the LX X. and are in accordance 
 with Jewish tradition (Bahr, ‘Symb.’ I. p. 
 266; Gesenius, ‘ Thes,’ p. 1310). 
 
 As the names of the three classes of 
 workers are in the masculine gender, we 
 know that they denote men, while the 
 spinners and dyers were women (v. 25). 
 From what we know of the proficiency 
 
 ' DD2 
 
 419 
 
O 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVI. 
 
 t The offerings are delivered to the workmen. 
 5 The liberality of the people ts restrained. 
 8 The curtains of cherubims. 14 The cur- 
 tains of goats’ hair. 19 The covering of 
 
 skins. 20 The boards with their sockets. 
 31 The bars. 35 The vail. 37 The hanging 
 Sor the door. 
 
 HEN wrought Bezaleel and 
 
 Aholiab, and every wise hearted 
 man, in whom the Lorp put wisdom 
 and understanding to know how to 
 work all manner of work for the ser- 
 vice of the sanctuary, according to all 
 that the Lorp had commanded. 
 
 2 And Moses called Bezaleel and 
 Aholiab, and every wise hearted man, 
 in whose heart the Lorp had put 
 wisdom, even every one whose heart 
 stirred him up to come unto the work 
 to do it: 
 
 3 And they received of Moses all 
 the offering, which the children of 
 Israel had brought for the work of the 
 service of the sanctuary, to make it 
 withal. And they brought yet unto 
 him free offerings every morning. 
 
 4 And all the wise men, that wrought 
 all the work of the sanctuary, came 
 every man from his work which they 
 made; 
 
 5 " And they spake unto Moses, 
 saying, The people bring much more 
 than enough for the service of the 
 work, which the Lorp commanded 
 to make. 
 
 6 And Moses gave commandment, 
 
 of the textile arts in Egypt in early times, 
 we need not wonder at the exact divi- 
 sion of labour among the Hebrews which 
 the use of the terms in this verse indicates. 
 —It is remarkable in regard to the other 
 arts of construction, that the workman 
 in each of them was called by the general 
 name artificer (in Hebrew, literally, oxe awho 
 cuts) added to the name of the material in 
 which he worked: thus the carpenter was 
 called an artificer in wood; the smith, 
 an-artificer in iron; the mason, or the 
 lapidary (xxviii, 11), an artificer in stone, 
 —The view given in these notes of the three 
 kinds of workers in textile fabrics, is sub- 
 stantially that of Gesenius, Bahr, Fiirst, Wi- 
 ner and others. But Knobel and Keil take 
 a different view respecting the embroiderer, 
 
 EX OBUSHAYL AVE, 
 
 [v. I—13. 
 
 and they caused it to be proclaimed 
 
 - 
 
 throughout the camp, saying, Let 
 neither man nor woman make any 
 more work for the offering of the 
 sanctuary. So the people were re- 
 strained from bringing. 
 
 7 For the stuff they had was suf- 
 ficient for all the work to make it, 
 and too much. 
 
 8 4 7¢And every wise hearted man @ chap. 26, 
 
 among them that wrought the work ~~ 
 of the tabernacle made ten curtains 
 of fine twined linen, and blue, and 
 purple, and scarlet: with cherubims 
 of cunning work made he them. 
 
 9g The length of one curtain was 
 twenty and eight cubits, and the 
 breadth of one curtain four cubits: 
 the curtains were all of one size. 
 
 ro And he coupled the five curtains 
 one unto another: and the other five 
 curtains he coupled one unto another. 
 
 11 And he made loops of blue on 
 the edge of one curtain from the sel- 
 vedge in the coupling: likewise he 
 made in the uttermost side of another 
 curtain, in the coupling of the second. 
 
 12 °Fifty loops made he in one ? chap. 26 
 
 curtain, and fifty loops made he in the ~~” 
 edge of the curtain which was in the 
 coupling of the second: the loops held . 
 one curtain to another. 
 
 13 And he made fifty taches of 
 gold, and coupled the curtains one 
 unto another with the taches: so it 
 became one tabernacle. 
 
 and consider that he worked not with a 
 needle but with a loom of some peculiar kind. 
 
 CuHarp, XXXVI, 
 
 Bezaleel, Aholiab, and their assistants are 
 set to work, 
 _ eye 
 1. See on Xxxi, 3. 
 4. the wise men] i.e, the skilful men. See 
 ON XXXi. 3. 
 
 3, 5—7. See on xxv, 2, 
 The Tabernacle is made. 
 8— 38. y 
 8—13. See on xxvi. 1—6. 
 
 8. made he them] Rather, were they 
 made. A corresponding change should be 
 made in most of the verses in this Chapter. 
 See On XXxXVii. I—s5. ; 
 
 SS 
 
 | 
 : 
 
 — a 
 
v. 14-—38.] 
 
 14 4 And he made curtains of goats’ 
 hair for the tent over the tabernacle: 
 eleven curtains he made them. 
 
 15 The length of one curtain was 
 thirty cubits, and four cubits was the 
 breadth of one curtain: the eleven 
 curtains were of one size. 
 
 16 And he coupled five curtains 
 by themselves, and six curtains by 
 themselves. . 
 
 17 And he made fifty loops upon 
 the uttermost edge of the curtain in 
 the coupling, and fifty loops made he 
 upon the edge of the curtain which 
 coupleth the second. 
 
 18 And he made fifty taches of 
 brass to couple the tent together, that 
 it might be one. 
 
 1g And he made a covering for 
 the tent of rams’ skins dyed red, and a 
 covering of badgers’ skins above that. 
 
 20 {| And he made boards for the 
 tabernacle ofshittim wood, standing up. 
 
 21 The length of a board was ten 
 cubits, and the breadth of a board 
 one cubit and a half. 
 
 22, One board had two tenons, 
 equally distant one from another: thus 
 did he make for all the boards of the 
 tabernacle. 
 
 23 And he made boards for the 
 tabernacle; twenty boards for the 
 south side southward: | 
 
 24 And forty sockets of silver he 
 made under the twenty boards; two 
 sockets under one board for his two 
 tenons, and two sockets under another 
 board for his two tenons. 
 
 25 And for the other side of the 
 tabernacle, which is toward the north 
 corner, he made twenty boards, 
 
 26 And their forty sockets of silver ; 
 two sockets under one board, and two 
 sockets under another board. 
 
 14—18. See on xxvi. 7—13. 
 
 19. See on xxvi. 14. 
 
 20—34. See on xxvi, 15—29. 
 
 22. equally distant one from another] set 
 in order one against another. See 
 XXXVI. 17. 
 
 27. for the sides| for the back. See 
 Sxvi. 22. 
 
 PE Awa Sy A CYT, 
 
 A21 
 27 And for the sides of the taber- 
 
 nacle westward he made six boards. ° 
 
 28 And two boards made he for 
 the corners of the tabernacle in the 
 two sides. 
 
 29 And they were fcoupled be- t Heb. 
 neath, and coupled together at the ne 
 head thereof, to one ring: thus he did 
 to both of them in both the corners. 
 
 30 And there were eight boards; 
 and their sockets were sixteen sockets 
 of silver, under every board two Heb. 
 sockets. eee 
 
 31 4 And he made “bars of shittim Sad 
 wood; five for the boards of the one 277%. | 
 side of the tabernacle, oe 
 
 32 And five bars for the boards of et 
 the other side of the tabernacle, and 
 five bars for the boards of the taber- 
 nacle for the sides westward. 
 
 33 And he made the middle bar to 
 shoot through the boards from the one 
 end to the other. 
 
 34 And he overlaid the boards with 
 gold, and made their rings of gold to 
 be places for the bars, and overlaid the 
 bars with gold. 
 
 35 | And he made a vail of blue, 
 and purple, and scarlet, and fine 
 twined linen: wzth cherubims made 
 he it of cunning work. 
 
 36 And he made thereunto four 
 pillars of shittim wood, and overlaid 
 them with gold: their hooks were of 
 gold; and he cast for them four sockets 
 of silver. 
 
 7 ™ And he made an hanging for 
 the tabernacle door of blue, and purple, 
 and scarlet, and fine twined linen, ‘of | Heb. 
 needlework ; of a 
 
 38 And the five pillars of it with mien 
 their hooks: and he overlaid their 9» | 
 chapiters and their fillets with gold: 
 but their five sockets were of brass. 
 
 33. to shoot through the boards] rather, to 
 reach across the boards. See xxvi, 28. 
 
 35, 36. See on xxvi. 31, 32- 
 
 37. an hanging for the tabernacle door] 
 anentrance curtain for the entering 
 of the Tent. See on xxvi. 36. 
 
 38. their chapiters and their fillets] their 
 capitals and their connecting rods. 
 
A422 
 
 @ chap. 25. 
 10. 
 
 ® chap. 25. 
 17. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVII. 
 
 1 Theark. 6 The mercy seat with cherubims. 
 10 The table with his vessels. 17 The candle- 
 stick with his lamps and instruments. 25 
 The altar of incense. 29 The anointing oil 
 and sweet incense. 
 
 ND Bezalee! made “the ark of 
 
 shittim wood: two cubits and 
 
 a half was the length of it, and a 
 
 cubit and a half the breadth of it, and 
 a cubit and a half the height of it: 
 
 2 And he overlaid it with pure 
 gold within and without, and made a 
 crown of gold to it round about. 
 
 3 And he cast for it four rings of 
 gold, to be set by the four corners of 
 it; even two rings upon the one side 
 of it, and two rings upon the other 
 side of if 
 
 4 And he made staves of shittim 
 wood, and overlaid them with gold. 
 
 5 And he put the staves into the 
 rings by the sides of the ark, to bear 
 the*ark; 
 
 6 4 And he made the ?mercy seat 
 of pure gold: two cubits and a half 
 was the length thereof, and one cubit 
 and a half the breadth thereof. 
 
 Le OND Ubay 
 
 XXXVIT. 
 
 mercy seatward were the faces of the 
 cherubims. 
 
 10 4 And he made the table of shittim 
 wood : two cubits was the length there- 
 of, and a cubit the breadth thereof, 
 and a cubit and a half the height 
 thereof : 
 
 1m And he overlaid it with pure 
 gold, and made thereunto a crown of 
 gold round about. 
 
 12 Also he made thereunto a border 
 of an handbreadth round about; and 
 made a crown of gold for the desde 
 thereof round about. 
 
 13 And he cast for it four rings of 
 gold, and put the rings upon the four 
 corners that were in the four feet 
 thereof. 
 
 14 Over against the border were 
 the rings, the places for the staves to 
 bear the table. 
 
 15 And he made the staves ofshittim 
 wood, and overlaid them with gold, to 
 bear the table. 
 
 16 And he made the vessels which 
 
 [v. 1—19, 
 
 were upon the table, his ‘dishes, and ¢ chap. 25 
 
 his spoons, and his bowls, and his” 
 
 covers 'to cover withal, of pure gold. 10r, 
 17 4 And he made the “candlestick 222% 
 
 sg with- 
 of pure gold: of beaten work made 4%... 9< 
 
 7 And he made two cherubims of 
 gold, beaten out of one piece made he 
 them, on the two ends of the mercy 
 
 out of, &c. 
 
 Seat 5 
 
 8 One cherub 'on the end on this 
 ‘side, and another cherub 'on the other 
 end on that side: out of the mercy 
 seat made he the cherubims on the 
 two ends thereof. 
 
 g And the cherubims spread out 
 their wings on high, and covered with 
 their wings over the mercy seat, with 
 their faces one to another; even to the 
 
 he the candlestick; his shaft, and his 3:- 
 branch, his bowls, his knops, and his 
 Hower were of the same: 
 
 18 Red six branches going out of 
 the sides thereof; three branches of 
 the candlestick out of the one side 
 thereof, and three branches of the 
 candlestick out of the other side 
 thereof: 
 
 Ig Three bowls made after the 
 
 These rods united the heads of the pillars, 
 like the connecting rods of the Court (xxvii. 
 10). Neither these nor the capitals are men- 
 tioned in the instructions in xxvi, 37. See 
 Note at the end of Ch, xxvi. 
 Cuap, XXXVII. 
 The Furniture of the Tabernacle is made. 
 I—29. 
 
 1—5. See on xxv. ro—16 and on xxxv. 11. 
 It has been observed that the Ark, as the most 
 precious thing made for the Sanctuary, is ex- 
 pressly spoken of as the workmanship of Beza- 
 leel himself, ‘The expression here is quite free 
 
 from ambiguity; but to prevent misunder- 
 standing, it may be well to observe that in 
 chap, xxxvi, 8, ro, II, 12, 13, 14, 16, 197paes 
 19, 20, &c., and elsewhere, there is no nomi- 
 native expressed in the Hebrew, and the verb 
 is used indefinitely, as in the German phrase 
 with man and the French one with on. In 
 translating into English, it would be better 
 in such cases to use the passive voice, See 
 on xxxvi, 8. 
 
 6—9. See on xxv, 17—22, 
 
 7. beaten out of one piece| See on xxv, 18, 
 
 10—16. See on xxv, 23—3o. 
 
 17—24. See on xxv, 3I—39. 
 
€ chap. 30. 
 34. 
 
 v. 20—8.] 
 
 fashion of almonds in one branch, a 
 knop and a flower; and three bowls 
 made like almonds in another branch, 
 a knop and a flower: so throughout 
 the six branches going out of the 
 candlestick. 
 
 20 And in the candlestick were four 
 
 bowls made like almonds, his knops, 
 
 and his flowers: 
 
 21 And a knop under two branches 
 of the same, and a knop under two 
 branches of the same, and a knop 
 under two branches of the same, ac- 
 cording to the six branches going out 
 of it. 
 
 22 Their knops and their branches 
 were of the same: all of it was one 
 beaten work of pure gold. 
 
 23 And he made his seven lamps, 
 and his snuffers, and his snuffdishes, 
 of pure gold. 
 
 24 Of a talent of pure gold made 
 he it, and all the vessels thereof. 
 
 25 “And he made the incense altar 
 of shittim wood: the length of it was 
 a cubit, and the breadth of it a cubit; 
 it was foursquare; and two cubits was 
 the height of it; the horns thereof 
 were of the same. 
 
 26 And he overlaid it with pure 
 gold, both the top of it, and the sides 
 thereof round about, and the horns 
 of it: also he made unto it a crown 
 of gold round about. 
 
 27 And he made two rings of gold 
 for it under the crown thereof, by the 
 two corners of it, upon the two sides 
 thereof, to be places for the staves to 
 bear it withal. 
 
 EX Oe os VILLE OS XV TTT, 
 
 42 
 
 28 And he made the staves ofshittim 
 wood, and overlaid them with gold. 
 
 29 {1 And he made “the holy an-7chap. 3°. 
 
 ointing oil, and the pure incense of ~~ 
 sweet spices, according to the work of 
 the apothecary. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXVIII. 
 1 The altar of burnt offering. 8 The laver of 
 brass. 9 The court. 21 The sum of that the 
 people offered. 
 
 ND “he made the altar of burnt ¢ chap. 27. 
 
 offering of shittim wood: five ~ 
 cubits was the length thereof, and five 
 cubits the breadth thereof; zt was four- 
 square; and three cubits the height 
 thereof. 
 
 2 And he made the horns thereof 
 on the four corners of it; the horns 
 thereof were of the same: and he over- 
 laid it with brass. 
 
 3 And he made all the vessels of 
 the altar, the pots, and the shovels, 
 and the basons, and the fleshhooks, 
 and the firepans: all the vessels there- 
 of made he of brass. 
 
 4 And he made for the altar a brasen 
 grate of network under the compass 
 thereof beneath unto the midst of it. 
 
 5 And he cast four rings for the 
 four ends of the grate of brass, to be 
 places for the staves. 
 
 6 And he made the staves of shittim 
 wood, and overlaid them with brass. 
 
 7 And he put the staves into the 
 rings on the sides of the altar, to bear 
 it withal; he made the altar hollow 
 with boards. 
 
 8 4 And he made the laver of 
 brass, and the foot of it of brass, of 
 
 25—28. See on xxx, I—I0, 
 29, See on xxx, 22—38, 
 
 Cuap. XX XVIII. 
 
 The Brazen Altar, the Laver, and the Court 
 
 are made. 
 I—20, 
 1—7. See on xxvii, 1—8. 
 8. the laver| See on xxx, 18—a21, It 
 
 appears that the metal for this laver was sup- 
 plied by women, who gave up their bronze 
 mirrors, such as were commonly used’ in 
 Egypt and elsewhere ( Wilkinson, ‘ Pop. Acc,’ 
 Il. p. 336). This is generally approved by 
 critics as the simple meaning of the Hebrew, 
 
 and it agrees with the ancient versions and 
 the Targums, The other interpretations— 
 one, that the laver was furnished with mir- 
 rors for the use of the women who served in 
 the Sanctuary (Michaelis, Bahr) ; and another, 
 that its sides were adorned with figures in 
 relief of women ranged in a religious proces- 
 sion (Knobel)—only deserve notice from the 
 learning and reputation of their authors, The 
 women who assembled at the entrance 
 of the Tent of meeting were most pro- 
 bably devout women who loved the public 
 service of religion, ‘The giving up their 
 mirrors for the use of the Sanctuary was a fit 
 sacrifice for such women to make (cf, on 
 
424, 
 
 i Or, 
 brasen 
 glasses. 
 
 t Heb. as- 
 
 sembling 
 by troops. 
 
 E-XO.DiUS: 
 
 the ' lookingglasses of the women 
 tassembling, which assembled at the 
 door of the tabernacle of the con- 
 gregation. 
 
 9 { And he made the court: on the 
 south side southward the hangings of 
 the court were of fine twined linen, an 
 hundred cubits : 
 
 10 Their pillars were twenty, and 
 their brasen sockets twenty; the hooks 
 of the pillars and their fillets were of 
 silver. 
 
 11 And for the north side the hang- 
 ings were an hundred cubits, their pil- 
 lars were twenty, and their sockets of 
 brass twenty; the hooks of the pillars 
 and their fillets of silver. 
 
 12 And for the west side were hang- 
 ings of fifty cubits, their pillars ten, 
 and their sockets ten; the hooks of 
 the pillars and their fillets of silver. 
 
 13 And for the east side eastward 
 fifty cubits. 
 
 14 [he hangings of the one side of 
 the gate were fifteen cubits; their pil- 
 lars three, and their sockets three. 
 
 15 And for the other side of the 
 court gate, on this hand and that hand, 
 were hangings of fifteen cubits; their 
 pillars three, and their sockets three. 
 
 16 All the hangings of the court 
 round about were of fine twined linen. 
 
 17 And the sockets for the pillars 
 were of brass; the hooks of the pillars 
 
 1A ONS BETS [v. 9-24: 
 and their fillets of silver; and the over- 
 laying of their chapiters of silver; and 
 all the pillars of the court were filleted 
 with silver. 
 
 18 And the hanging for the gate of 
 the court was needlework, of blue, and 
 purple, and scarlet, and fine twined 
 linen: and twenty cubits was the 
 length, and the height in the breadth 
 was five cubits, answerable to the hang- 
 ings of the court. 
 
 1g And their pillars were four, and 
 their sockets of brass four; their hooks 
 of silver, and the overlaying of their 
 chapiters and their fillets of silver. 
 
 20 And all the “pins of the taber- ° chap. 27 
 
 nacle, and of the court round about, 
 were of brass. 
 
 21 4 This is the sum of the taber- 
 nacle, even of the tabernacle of testi- 
 mony, as it was counted, according to 
 the commandment of Moses, for the 
 service of the Levites, by the hand of 
 Ithamar, son to Aaron the priest. 
 
 22 And Bezaleel the son of Uri, the 
 son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah, 
 made all that the Lorp commanded 
 Moses. 
 
 23 And with him was Aholiab, son 
 of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan, an 
 engraver, and a cunning workman, 
 and an embroiderer in blue, and in 
 purple, and in scarlet, and fine linen. 
 
 24 All the gold that was occupied 
 
 Xxxv, 22). We know from the instance of 
 Anna (Luke ii. 36) that pious women, in later 
 ages, used to spend much time within the pre- 
 cincts of the Temple. But there seems to be 
 but weak ground for the notion of Hengsten- 
 berg and others that these women ever form- 
 ed a regularly constituted. order, like the 
 widows, or deaconesses, of the early Church, 
 and the Nazarites for life in the time of 
 the Prophets (Lam. iv. 7; Amos ii. 11). 
 Hengstenberg conceives that Moses made no 
 specific law on the subject because the in- 
 stitution had been adopted from the customs 
 of the Egyptian temples. ‘The only passages 
 quoted from the Old Testament in support 
 of the existence of such an order of women are 
 1 Sam. ii. 22, Lam, il. 21 (Hengst. ‘ Egypt,’ 
 &c. p. 184). 
 
 9—20. See on xxvii, Io—19. 
 
 18. the height in the breadth was five 
 cubits] ‘The meaning seems to be that the 
 
 height of the curtain answered to the breadth 
 of the stuff of which it was formed; i.e, five 
 cubits. See xxvii, 18. 
 
 The sum of the metals used in the Sanctuary. 
 2I—31. 
 
 21. ‘This is the reckoning of the Ta- 
 bernacle, the Tabernacle of the Tes- 
 timony (see on xxv, 16) as it was 
 reckoned up according to the command- 
 ment of Moses, by the service of the Levites, 
 by the hand of Ithamar,” &c. The weight of 
 the metals was taken by the Levites, under 
 the direction of Ithamar. 
 
 23. an engraver] an artificer.—a cun- 
 ning workman] a skilled weaver. See on 
 XXXV. 35. 
 
 24. of the holy place] Rather, of the 
 Sanctuary. The gold was employed not 
 only in the Holy Place, but in the Most Holy 
 
+t Heb. 
 a poll, 
 
 v. 25—28.] EXODUS. 
 for the work in all the work of the 
 holy place, even the gold of the offer- 
 ing, was twenty and nine talents, and 
 seven hundred and thirty shekels, after 
 the shekel of the sanctuary. 
 
 25 And the silver of them that were 
 numbered of the congregation was an 
 hundred talents, and a thousand seven 
 hundred and threescore and fifteen 
 shekels, after the shekel of the sanc- 
 tuary : 
 
 26 A bekah for tevery man, that is, 
 
 ROK VT. 
 half a shekel, after the shekel of the 
 
 sanctuary, for every one that went to 
 be numbered, from twenty years old 
 and upward, for six hundred thousand 
 and three thousand and five hundred 
 and fifty men. 
 
 27 And of the hundred talents of 
 silver were cast the sockets of the 
 sanctuary, and the sockets of the vail ; 
 an hundred sockets of the hundred 
 talents, a talent for a socket. 
 
 28 And of the thousand seven 
 
 Place and in the entrance to the Tent (xxxvi. 
 38). 
 
 the gold of the offering| the gold of the 
 wave offering (see pref, to Leviticus). 
 
 talents...the shekel of the sanctuary| The 
 Shekel was the common standard of weight 
 and value with the Hebrews: but what its 
 weight was in early times, as compared with 
 our standard, is a matter on which there has 
 been much difference of opinion, There is 
 however no particular reason to suppose that 
 the Hebrew standard underwent much alter- 
 ation in the course of ages; and in regard to 
 later times, we have three distinct elements 
 of calculation which lead to a tolerably har- 
 monious result. (a) According to the rab- 
 binists, the shekel weighed 320 barley grains, 
 which are equal to about 214 English grains, 
 the weight of which was originally taken from 
 a grain of wheat. (4), There are several 
 silver shekels in existence coined in the 
 Maccabean times (see 1 Macc. xv. 6), and, 
 making allowance for wear, each of these ap- 
 pears to have weighed 220 grains. (c) The 
 LXX., when they do not retain the origi- 
 nal name in the form gixdos, render it by 
 didpaypov (Gen. xxiii. 15; Ex. xxi, 32, Xxx. 
 13, 153 Lev. xxvii. 3; Num. ii. 47, &c.): 
 they also render bekah, the half shekel, by 
 Spaxyyn (see v. 26). Now the Macedonian 
 didrachmon, with which they must have been 
 familiar, weighed 218 grains, It hence ap- 
 pears that we cannot be far wrong in esti- 
 mating the shekel at 220 English grains (just 
 over half an ounce avoidupois) and its value 
 in silver as 25. 7d.—The statement of Jose- 
 phus (‘ Ant.’ m1. 8. § 2), that the shekel was 
 equal to four Attic drachms (252 grains) is 
 evidently a rough estimate: and still further 
 from accuracy is his turning the fifty shekels 
 of 2 K. xv. 20 into fifty drachms (‘ Ant.’ 
 IX, rr. § 1)—-A question is raised as to the 
 meaning of the term, ‘‘a shekel of the sanc- 
 tuary.” ‘The rabbinists speak of a common 
 shekel of half the weight of the shekel of the 
 sanctuary. But there is no sufficient reason 
 to suppose that such a distinction existed in 
 ancient times, and the Shekel of the Sanctuary 
 
 (or, the Holy Shekel) would seem to denote 
 no more than an exact Shekel, ‘after the 
 king’s weight” (2 S. xiv. 26), ‘* current money 
 of the merchant” (Gen. xxiil. 16). 
 
 In the reign of Joash, a collection similar 
 to the one here mentioned, apparently at 
 the same rate of capitation, was made for 
 the repairs of the Temple (2 Chron, xxiv. 9). 
 The tax of later times, called didrachma 
 (Matt. xvii. 27), which has often been con- 
 nected with this passage of Exodus, and which 
 was recognized by our Lord as having the 
 same solemn meaning as this payment of half 
 a shekel, was not, like this one and that of 
 Joash, a collection for a special occasion, 
 but a yearly tax for the support of the 
 Temple, of a whole shekel (d/dpaypov).—See 
 On XXX. 13. 
 
 The Talent (Heb. sikkar, LX X. rdadavrov) 
 contained 3000 shekels, as may be gathered 
 from vv. 25, 26. According to the com- 
 putation here adopted, the Hebrew Talent 
 was 942lbs, avoirdupois, The Greek (A‘gi- 
 netan) Talent, from which the LXX. and 
 most succeeding versions have taken the name 
 talent, was 8211bs, The original word, 47kear, 
 would denote a circular mass, and nearly the 
 same word, serker, was in use amongst the 
 Egyptians for a mass of metal cast in the 
 form of a massive ring with its weight stamp- 
 ed upon it. 
 
 26. A bekah| Literally, a half: the words 
 ‘¢half a shekel,” &c. appear to be inserted 
 only for emphasis, to enforce the accuracy to 
 be observed in the payment. See on xxx. 13, 
 where there is a similar expression, and cf. 
 XXX. I5.—Respecting the capitation and the 
 numbering of the people, see on Xxx. 12. 
 ‘There must have been, in addition to the sum 
 of the half shekels, the free-will offerings of 
 silver (see xxxv. 24), of which no reckoning is 
 here made. They may perhaps have been 
 amongst what was returned to the donors as 
 being more than enough (xxxvi. 7). 
 
 27. sockets] bases. See on Xxvi. 19. 
 
 28. The hooks, chapiters and fillets here 
 spoken of belonged to the pillars of the Court. 
 See XXvil. 10, 17, 
 
426 
 
 hundred seventy and five shekels he 
 made hooks for the pillars, and over- 
 laid their chapiters, and filleted them. 
 
 29 And the brass of the offering 
 was seventy talents, and two thousand 
 and four hundred shekels. 
 
 30 And therewith he made the 
 sockets to the door of the tabernacle 
 of the congregation, and the brasen 
 altar, and the brasen grate for it, and 
 all the vessels of the altar, 
 
 31 And the sockets of the court 
 
 30. sockets to the door of the tabernacle of 
 the congregation| bases for the entrance 
 of the Tent of meeting. See xxvi. 37, 
 
 the brasen altar| See xxvii. I—8. 
 
 31. the sockets of the court] See xxvil. 10, 17. 
 
 the pins of the tabernacle...the pins of the 
 court| See on xxvii. 19, 
 
 According to the estimate of the shekel that 
 has here been adopted, the weight of the 
 metals mentioned in this chapter would be 
 nearly as follows, in avoirdupois weight :— 
 
 Gold, ston 4 cwt. 2 qrs. 13 lbs, 
 Silver, 4 tons 4 cwt. 2 qrs. 20 lbs. 
 Bronze, 2 tons 19 cwt. 2 qrs. 11 lbs, 
 
 The value of the gold, if pure, in our money 
 would. be £175075. 13s., and of the silver 
 £38034. 155. tod. ‘The quantities of the 
 precious metals come quite within the limits 
 of probability, if we consider the condition 
 of the Israelites when they left Egypt (see 
 introd. note to Exod, and on xxv. 3), and 
 the object for which the collection was made. 
 There is no reasonable ground to call in 
 question the substantial accuracy of the state- 
 
 ments of Strabo (XVI. p. 778) and Dio-: 
 
 dorus (III. 45) regarding the great stores of 
 gold collected by the Arab tribes near the 
 fElanitic Gulf, and they were probably still 
 more abundant at this time when the tribes 
 must have come into frequent contact with 
 the Israelites. ‘There may be no trace of na- 
 tive gold in those regions at present; but the 
 entire exhaustion of natural supplies of the 
 precious metals is too familiarly known to 
 need more than a bare notice in this place (see 
 ‘Bib. Atlas’ of the S.P. C. K. p. 38). Bahr, 
 Knobel and others have remarked that the 
 quantities collected for the Tabernacle are in- 
 significant when compared with the hoards of 
 gold and silver collected in the East in recent, 
 as well as ancient, times. In communities in 
 which there is not much commercial stir, and 
 in consequence not much use for a circulating 
 medium, the precious metals will be more 
 readily accumulated either for a great national 
 object, as in this case, or for the gratification 
 of aruler. The enormous wealth of the sove- 
 reigns, and also of the temples, of India, a 
 
 EXODUS, XXXVIIL XXXIX. 
 
 [v. 29—1, 
 
 round about, and the sockets of the 
 court gate, and all the pins of the 
 tabernacle, and all the pins of the 
 court round about. 
 
 CHAPTER XXXIX. 
 
 1 Zhe cloths of service and holy garments. 2 
 The ephod. 8 The breastplate. 22 The robe 
 of the ephod. 27 The coats, mitre, and girdle 
 of fine linen. 30 The plate of the holy crown. 
 32 All is viewed and approved by Moses. 
 
 ND of the blue, and purple, and 
 scarlet, they made cloths of ser- 
 
 vice, to do service in the holy place, 
 
 century ago, taking the most moderate state- 
 ments, may furnish examples. As instances 
 in ancient times, we may refer to the accounts 
 of gold in the temple of Belus (Diod, Sic. 11. 
 9; cf. Herodot. I. 183); of the wealth of 
 Sardanapalus (Ctesias, edit. Bahr, p. 431); 
 and of the spoils taken by Cyrus (Plin. ‘H. N.’ 
 XXXIII. 15, 47) and by Alexander (Diod. Sic. 
 XviI. 66). All reasonable allowance may be 
 made for exaggeration in these statements, and 
 the argument, in its connection with well as- 
 certained facts, will still be left amply strong 
 enough for our purpose. For more examples, 
 see Bahr, ‘Symbolik,’ I. p. 259; Kmobel on 
 Ex. xxv. and xxxviil. 
 
 It is worthy of notice that silver, in the 
 time of Homer, appears to have been more 
 precious than gold amongst the Greeks (Glad- 
 stone, ‘ Juventus Mundi,’ p. 531). The 
 treasures of Thrace and Laurium were then 
 unknown, But it seems to have been other- 
 wise with the Asiatic nations, ‘The word 
 silver (according to Pictet) is Sanscrit. ‘This 
 would tend to shew that the metal was 
 known to the Aryan race before the Ger- 
 manic nations migrated to the West. ‘The 
 forefathers of the Greeks and Romans pro- 
 bably lost all knowledge of it, and when they 
 again met with it, they gave it quite a dif- 
 ferent name (dpyiptov, argentum). ‘This same 
 argument may be applied to other metals. 
 But what distinguishes silver is, that it was 
 at first obtained by the people of Southern 
 Europe from sparing, and, perhaps, distant 
 sources. We know that the quantity of silver 
 at Rome was very greatly increased by the 
 contributions obtained in the Punic Wars 
 (Niebuhr, ‘ Hist. of Rome,’ Vol. 111. p. 613). 
 By this time Spain had begun to yield its 
 supply. ‘The Hebrews and Egyptians proba- 
 bly obtained the metal in the earliest times 
 both from Asia and Africa, 
 
 CHAP. XXXIX. 
 
 The Priests’ Dresses are made. 
 I—3I. 
 1. See on xxviii. 5. The fine linen is omit- 
 ted in this verse, but is mentioned in the next, 
 
5 chap. 28. 
 9. 
 
 €chap. 28. 
 
 I2. 
 
 ¥Or, ruby. 
 
 v. 2—21.] 
 
 ‘and *made the holy garments for 
 Aaron; as the Lorp commanded 
 Moses. 
 
 2 And he made the ephod of gold, 
 blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine 
 twined linen. 
 
 3 And they did beat the gold into 
 thin plates, and cut zt into wires, to 
 work it in the blue, and in the purple, 
 and in the scarlet, and in the fine 
 linen, with cunning work. 
 
 4 They made shoulderpieces for it, 
 to couple i¢ together: by the two 
 edges was it coupled together. 
 
 5 And the curious girdle of his 
 ephod, that was upon it, was of the 
 same, according to the work thereof; 
 of gold, blue, and purple, and scarlet, 
 and fine twined linen; as the Lorp 
 commanded Moses. 
 
 6 { 2And they wrought onyx stones 
 inclosed in ouches of gold, graven, as 
 signets are graven, with the names of 
 the children of Israel. 
 
 7 And he put them on the shoulders 
 of the ephod, that they should be stones 
 for a “memorial to the children of Is- 
 rael; as the Lonp commanded Moses. 
 
 8 @ And he made the breastplate 
 of cunning work, like the work of the 
 ephod; of gold, blue, and purple, and 
 scarlet, and fine twined linen. 
 
 9 It was foursquare; they made 
 the breastplate double: a span was the 
 length thereof, and a span the breadth 
 thereof, being doubled. 
 
 to And they set in it four rows of 
 stones: the first row was a 'sardius, 
 a topaz, and acarbuncle: this was the 
 first row. 
 
 | Sp. ON DR OR a. @.@.G D.e 
 
 1r And the second row, an eme- 
 rald, a sapphire, and a diamond. 
 
 12 And the third row, a ligure, an 
 agate, and an amethyst. 
 
 13 And the fourth row, a beryl, an 
 onyx, and a jasper: they were inclosed 
 in ouches of gold in their inclosings. 
 
 14 And the stones were according 
 to the names of the children of Israel, 
 twelve, according to their names, /rke 
 the engravings of a signet, every one 
 with his name, according to the twelve 
 tribes. 
 
 15 And they made upon the breast- 
 plate chains at the ends, of wreathen 
 work of pure gold. 
 
 16 And they made two ouches of 
 gold, and two gold rings; and put the 
 two rings in the two ends of the 
 breastplate. 
 
 17 And they put the two wreathen 
 chains of gold in the two rings on the 
 ends of the breastplate. 
 
 18 And the two ends of the two 
 wreathen chains they fastened in the 
 two ouches, and put them on the 
 shoulderpieces of the ephod, before it. 
 
 1g And they made two rings of 
 gold, and put them on the two ends 
 of the breastplate, upon the border of 
 it, which was on the side of the ephod 
 inward. 
 
 20 And they made two other golden 
 rings, and put them on the two sides 
 of the ephod underneath, toward the 
 forepart of it, over against the other 
 coupling thereof, above the curious 
 girdle of the ephod. 
 
 21 And they did bind the breast- 
 plate by his rings unto the rings of the 
 
 cloths of service] more properly, the gar- 
 ments of office. On these and the Holy 
 Garments, see On XxXI. Io. 
 
 2. the ephod| See on xxviii. 6 sq. 
 
 3. the gold] Seeon xxviil. 5. 
 
 with cunning work] with work of the 
 skilled weaver. See On XXVi. I, XXXV. 35. 
 
 5. the curious girdle] See on xxviit. 8. 
 
 6, '7. See on xxvill. 9—12. ys 
 
 8. the breastplate] See on xxvill. 15, 16. 
 
 10—13. On the precious stones, see on 
 XXVill. 17—20. 
 
 13. in their inclosings| Rather, in thelr 
 settings. See on XXVill, 11, 17. 
 
 15. chains at the ends, of wreathen work] 
 chains of wreathen work twisted 
 See On XXvVili, 14. 
 
 16. See on xxviii. 13, 23. 
 19. 
 
 20. ** And they made two rings of gold 
 and put them on the two shoulder-pieces 
 of the Ephod, low down in the front 
 of it, near the joining, above the 
 band for fastening it.” See au xxviii, 
 27. 
 
 21. See on xxviil. 28, 
 
 See on XXvill. 26, 27. 
 
 427 
 
428 
 
 @ chap. 28. 
 33: 
 
 € chap» 28. 
 42. 
 
 / chap. 28, 
 36. 
 
 ODDS Sr LS OE OLS 
 
 ephod with a lace of blue, that it might 
 be above the curious girdle of the 
 ephod, and that the breastplate might 
 not be loosed from the ephod; as the 
 Lorp commanded Moses. 
 
 22 4 And he made the robe of the 
 ephod of woven work, all of blue. 
 
 23 And there was an hole in the 
 midst of the robe, as the hole of an 
 habergeon, with a band round about 
 the hole, that it should not rend. 
 
 24 And they made upon the hems 
 of the robe pomegranates of blue, and 
 purple, and scarlet, and twined /inen. 
 
 25 And they made “bells of pure 
 gold, and put the bells between the 
 pomegranates upon the hem of the 
 robe, round about between the pome- 
 
 ranates ; 
 
 [v. 2243: 
 
 gation finished: and the children of 
 Israel did according to all that the 
 Lorp commanded Moses, so did they. 
 
 33 { And they brought the taber- 
 nacle unto Moses, the tent, and all his 
 furniture, his taches, his boards, his 
 bars, and his pillars, and his sockets, 
 
 34 And the covering of rams’ skins 
 dyed red, and the covering of badgers’ 
 skins, and the vail of the covering, 
 
 35 The ark of the testimony, and 
 the staves thereof, and the mercy seat, 
 
 36 The table, and all the vessels 
 thereof, and the shewbread, 
 
 37 The pure candlestick, with the 
 lamps thereof, even with the lamps to 
 be set in order, and all the vessels 
 thereof, and the oii for light, 
 
 38 And the golden altar, and the 
 
 26 A bell and a pomegranate, a bell anointing oil, and ‘the sweet incense, Hise | 
 and a pomegranate, round about the and the hanging for the tabernacle tie: 
 Spices. 
 
 hem of the robe to minister im; as the 
 Lorp commanded Moses. 
 
 27 4 And they made coats of fine 
 linen of woven work for Aaron, and 
 for his sons, 
 
 28 And a mitre of fine linen, and 
 goodly bonnets of fine linen, and “linen 
 breeches of fine twined linen, 
 
 29 And a girdle of fine twined 
 linen, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, 
 of needlework; as the Lorp com- 
 manded Moses. 
 
 30 4 And they made the plate of 
 the holy crown of pure gold, and wrote 
 upon it a writing, /i#e to the engrav- 
 ings of a signet, “HOLINESS TO 
 THE LORD. 
 
 31 And they tied unto it a lace 
 of blue, to fasten 7t on high upon 
 the mitre; as the Lorp commanded 
 Moses. 
 
 32 4 ‘hus was all the work of the 
 tabernacle of the tent of the congre- 
 
 door, 
 
 39 The brasen altar, and his grate 
 of brass, his staves, and all his vessels, 
 the laver and his foot, 
 
 40 The hangings of the court, his 
 pillars, and his sockets, and the hang- 
 ing for the court gate, his cords, and 
 his pins, and all the vessels of the ser- 
 vice of the tabernacle, for the tent of 
 the congregation, 
 
 41 The cloths of service to do ser- 
 vice in the holy place, and the holy 
 garments for Aaron the priest, and his 
 sons’ garments, to minister in the 
 priest’s office. 
 
 42 According to all that the Lorp 
 commanded Moses, so the children of 
 Israel made all the work. 
 
 43 And Moses did look upon all 
 the work, and, behold, they had done 
 it as the Lorp had commanded, even 
 so had they done it: and Moses blessed 
 
 them. 
 
 — 
 
 HOLINESS TO THE LORD] See on 
 
 XXVIll. 36, 
 
 22—26. See on xxviii. 31—35. 
 27. See on xxviii. 40, 41. 
 28. amitre| See on xxviii. 37. 
 bonnets| See on xxviii. 40. 
 breeches| See on xxviii. 42. 
 29. agirdle] See on xxviii. 4o. 
 
 30. the holy crown of pure gold| Cf. xxix. 
 6. See on xxviil. 36. 
 
 The whole work of the Sanctuary is submitted 
 to Moses and approved. 
 32—43- 
 33—38. See on xxxv. 11—15, and on 
 XXV1. I. 
 39, 40. See on xxxv. 16—18. 
 41. See vv. 1, 27, XXxi. To. 
 
PRODUS CAE 
 
 Vv. I—15.| 
 
 429 
 CHAPTER XL. 8 And thou shalt set up the court 
 1 The ees as big tse as janie round about, and hang up the hang- 
 We hamctyied. r 16 MPseh porformacth all things ing at the court gate. j 
 accordingly. 34 A cloud covereth the taber- 9 And thou shalt take the anoint- 
 nacle. ing oil, and anoint the tabernacle, and 
 ND the Lorp spake unto Moses, all that zs therein, and shalt hallow it, 
 saying, and all the vessels thereof: and it shall 
 2 On the first day of the first be holy. 
 month shalt thou set up the tabernacle 10 And thou shalt anoint the altar 
 of the tent of the congregation. of the burnt offering, and all his ves- 
 3 And thou shalt put therein the sels, and sanctify the altar: and it 
 ark of the testimony, and cover the shall be an altar ' most holy. t Heb. 
 
 holiness of 
 holinesses. 
 
 ark with the vail. 11 And thou shalt anoint the laver 
 
 @chap. 26. 4 And “thou shalt bring in the ta- and his foot, and sanctify it. 
 Hed. ble, and set in order ‘the things that 12 And thou shalt bring Aaron 
 oo” are to be set in order upon it; and and his sons unto the door of the 
 
 thou shalt bring in the candlestick, 
 and light the lamps thereof. 
 
 5 And thou shalt set the altar of 
 gold for the incense before the ark of 
 the testimony, and put the hanging of 
 the door to the tabernacle. 
 
 6 And thou shalt set the altar of 
 the burnt offering before the door of 
 the tabernacle of the tent of the con- 
 gregation. 
 
 7 And thou shalt set the laver be- 
 tween the tent of the congregation 
 and the altar, and shalt put water 
 therein. 
 
 tabernacle of the congregation, and 
 wash them with water. 
 
 13° And thou shalt put upon Aa- 
 ron the holy garments, and anoint 
 him, and sanctify him; that he may 
 minister unto me in the priest’s office. 
 
 14 And thou shalt bring his sons, 
 and clothe them with coats: 
 
 15 And thou shalt anoint them, 
 as thou didst anoint their father, that 
 they may minister unto me in the 
 priest’s office: for their anointing shall 
 surely be an everlasting priesthood 
 throughout their generations. 
 
 ee et er ee ee 
 
 Cuap. XL. 
 Moses is commanded to arrange the holy things, 
 and to anoint them and the priests. 
 I—Il. 
 
 here repeated in asummary form. The anoint- 
 ing is described Lev. vill. r1o—12. 
 
 9. vessels} utensils. The name includes 
 the whole of the furniture of the ‘Tabernacle. 
 See On XXVil. 19. 
 
 2. On the first day of the first month] See 10. vessels] utensils. 
 fide Li 5 most holy} In the preceding verse the 
 4. the things that are to be set in order| . Tabernacle and its utensils are said to be 
 
 The directions given in Lev. xxiv. s—g are here 
 presupposed, and must have been issued be- 
 fore this chapter was written. 
 
 5. before the ark| See on xxx. 6. 
 
 the hanging of the door to the tabernacle] 
 the curtain at the entrance of the 
 Tabernacle. 
 
 6. before the door of the tabernacle of the 
 tent of the congregation] before the en- 
 trance of the Tabernacle of the Tent 
 of meeting. 
 
 7, 8. See Note at the end of Ch. xxvi. § VI. 
 8. 
 entrance curtain. 
 
 9—11. ‘The directions to anoint and con- 
 secrate the Tabernacle and the Priests had 
 been previously given xxx. 26—3I. They are 
 
 hang up the hanging| hang up the — 
 
 rendered oly by the anointing; the Altar 
 and its utensils are here, and in xxx. Io, 
 said to be most holy, The term most holy 
 must not in this case be taken as express- 
 ing a higher degree of holiness than that 
 which belonged to the Tabernacle; it is only 
 used for emphasis, as a caution (it has been 
 conjectured) in reference to the position of 
 the Altar exposing it to the chance of being 
 touched by the people when they assembled 
 in the Court, while they were not permitted 
 to enter the Tabernacle. ‘The Tabernacle it- 
 self, with all that belonged to it, is called 
 most holy in XXX. 29. 
 
 12. the door of the tabernacle of the congre- 
 gation] the entrance of the Tent of 
 meeting. The directions in vv. 12—15 had 
 been previously given xxix. 4—9, XXX. 30; 
 the ceremony is described Lev. vill. 5, 6. 
 
430 
 
 6 Numb. 
 ts 
 
 16 Thus did Moses: according to 
 ali that the Lorp commanded him, 
 so did he. 
 
 17 { And it came to pass in the 
 first month in the second year, on the 
 first day of the month, that the ?ta 
 bernacle was reared up. | 
 
 18 And Moses reared up the ta- 
 bernacle, and fastened his sockets, and 
 set up the boards thereof, and put 
 in the bars thereof, and reared up his 
 pillars. 
 
 1g And he spread abroad the tent 
 over the tabernacle, and put the co- 
 vering of the tent above upon it; as 
 the Lorp commanded Moses. 
 
 Moses puts the Tabernacle in order. 
 17—33. 
 
 17. on the first day of the month] ‘That is, 
 on the first of the month Nisan (xii. 2, xiii. 4), 
 one year, wanting fourteen days, after the de- 
 parture of the Israelites from Egypt. ‘They 
 had been nearly three months in reaching the 
 foot of Mount Sinai (xix. 1); Moses had spent 
 eighty days on the mountain (xxiv. 18, xxxiv. 
 28), and some time must be allowed for what 
 is related in chap. xxiv., as well as for the in- 
 terval between the two periods which Moses 
 spent on the mountain (xxxlii. r—23). The 
 construction of the Tabernacle and its furni- 
 ture would thus appear to have occupied 
 something less than half a year. Bleek’s ob- 
 jection to this period as too short for the 
 completion of such a work (‘Introd. to O. T.’ 
 Vol. I. p. 247) is worth nothing if we duly 
 consider the interest which the whole people 
 must have felt in it, and the nature of the 
 structure, so unlike one of solid masonry. 
 
 19. The tent cloth was spread over the 
 tabernacle cloth, and the covering of skins 
 was put over the tent cloth. See xxvi. 1, 6, 
 11,14; and Note at the end of Ch. xxvi. § II. 
 
 20. the testimony] i.e. the Tables of stone 
 with the —Ten Commandments engraved on 
 them (see xxv. 16, xxxi. 18). Nothing else is 
 said to have been put into the Ark. ‘These 
 were found there by themselves in the time of 
 Solomon (x K. viii. 9; 2 Chron. v. 10). The 
 Pot of Manna was ‘laid up before the testi- 
 mony” (Ex. xvi. 34); Aaron’s rod was also 
 placed ‘‘ before the testimony” (Num. xvii. 
 10); and the Book of the Law was put at 
 ‘the side of the Ark” (Deut. xxxi. 26). 
 The expression ‘‘ before the testimony” ap- 
 pears to mean the space immediately in front 
 of the Ark. Most interpreters hold that 
 the Pot of Manna and Aaron’s rod were 
 placed between the Ark and the Vail. It is 
 however said in the Epistle to the Hebrews 
 
 EXODUS. 2CE, 
 
 [v. 16—23. 
 
 20 4 And he took and put the 
 testimony into the ark, and set the 
 staves on the ark, and put the mercy 
 seat above upon the ark: 
 
 21 And he brought the ark into 
 
 the tabernacle, and “set up the vail of ¢ chap. 
 the covering, and éovered the ark of © 
 
 the testimony; as the Lorp com- 
 manded Moses. 
 
 22 { And he put the table in the 
 tent of the congregation, upon the 
 side of the tabernacle northward, with- 
 out the vail. 
 
 23 And he set the bread in order. 
 upon it before the Lorp; as the 
 Lorp had commanded Moses. 
 
 that the Ark contained ‘‘the golden pot that 
 had manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and 
 the tables of the covenant” (ix. 4). From 
 this statement, and from the mode of expres- 
 sion in Kings and Chronicles (which appears 
 to indicate that the fact of the Ark’s contain- 
 ing nothing at that time but the Tables was 
 unexpected), it would seem that the other 
 articles were at some period put within the 
 Ark; and this accords with some rabbinical 
 traditions. It has however been conjectured 
 that ‘‘ before the testimony” may mean the 
 space within the Ark, at the back of which the 
 Tables are supposed to have been placed. 
 But from a comparison of Ex. xxx. 36 with 
 xl. 5, it appears that the two expressions 
 ‘¢ before the testimony,” and ‘* before the ark 
 of the testimony,” are equivalent and denote 
 the space in front of the Ark, even extending 
 to the outside of the Vail. Besides this, it 
 is plain that Aaron’s Rod, when it was brought 
 ‘before the testimony,” was merely restored 
 to the place ‘‘ before the Lord in the taber- 
 nacle of witness,” where it was first placed 
 along with the other rods (Num. xvil.; cf. v. 
 7 with v. 10). These considerations, added 
 to the presumption from Ex. xxv. 16, xl. 20, 
 that nothing but the Tables were put into the 
 Ark, seem to afford sufficient evidence that 
 the articles in question were not at first placed 
 within it, but in front of it. It is very pro- 
 bable that the pot and the rod had been put 
 into the Ark before it was taken by the Phi- 
 listines, but that they were not sent back with 
 the Ark and the Tables. 1 Sam. iv. 11, vi. 11. 
 the mercy seat| See on xxv. 21. 
 
 21. the vail of the covering] See on Xxxv. 
 12. 
 22—24. See on xxv. 23—29, and Lev, 
 XXIV. 5—9. : 
 
 23. he set the bread in order| Moses per- 
 formed these priestly functions (see On Xxviil. 
 1) of setting the Bread on the Table, lighting 
 
v. 24—38.] 
 
 24 ™ And he put the candlestick 
 in the tent of the congregation, over 
 against the table, on the side of the 
 tabernacle southward. 
 
 25 And he lighted the lamps before 
 the Lorp; as the Lorp commanded 
 Moses. 
 
 26 4 And he put the golden altar 
 
 in the tent of the congregation before 
 the vail: 
 
 27 And he burnt sweet incense 
 .thereon; 2s the Lorp commanded 
 - Moses. 
 
 28 ™ And he set up the hanging 
 
 at the door of the tabernacle. 
 
 29 And he put the altar of burnt 
 offering Sy the door of the tabernacle 
 of the tent of the congregation, and 
 offered upon it the burnt offering and 
 
 d chap. 30. the meat offering; as the “LorD com- 
 
 Q- 
 
 manded Moses. 
 
 30 ™ And he set the laver be- 
 tween the tent of the congregation 
 and the altar, and put water there, to 
 wash withal. 
 
 31 And Moses and Aaron and his 
 sons washed their hands and their feet 
 thereat: 
 
 32 When they went into the tent 
 
 the Lamps (v. 25), burning Incense (v. 27), 
 and offering the Daily Sacrifice (v. 29), before 
 
 _ the holy things with which they were per- 
 
 formed were anointed. The things had been 
 made expressly for the service of Jehovah, by 
 His command, and in this fact lay their essen- 
 tial sanctity, of which the anointing was only 
 the seal and symbol. Aaron and his sons, on 
 similar ground, having had the divine call, 
 took part in the service of the Sanctuary as 
 soon as the work was completed (v. 31). 
 But Moses took part with them, and most 
 likely took the lead, until they were conse- 
 crated and invested (Lev. viii.) and publicly 
 set apart for the office. See on Lev. vill. 14. 
 
 26. before the vail] that is, opposite to 
 the Ark, in the middle between the Table of 
 Shewbread on the North and the Candlestick 
 on the South (see on xxx. 36). 
 
 28. set up the hanging, Kc.] put up 
 the curtain at the entrance to the 
 Tabernacle. 
 
 29. by the door] at the entrance. It 
 is here evident that the term denoted a broad 
 space in front of the Tabernacle. See Plan, 
 Pp. 378. 
 
 81, 32. See xxx. 18—2I. 
 
 UX OMS KE. 4 
 
 of the congregation, and when they 
 came near unto the altar, they wash- 
 ed; as the Lornp commanded Moses. * 
 
 33 And he reared up the court 
 round about the tabernacle and the 
 altar, and set up the hanging of the 
 court gate. So Moses finished the 
 work. 
 
 4 
 
 od 
 
 I 
 
 34. 1 ¢Then a cloud covered the ¢ Numb. o. 
 tent of the congregation, and the rkingss, 
 
 glory of the Lorp filled the taber- * 
 nacle. 
 
 35 And Moses was not able to 
 enter into the tent of the congrega- 
 tion, because the cloud abode thereon, 
 and the glory of the Lorn filled the 
 tabernacle. 
 
 36 And when the cloud was taken 
 up from over the tabernacle, the chil- 
 
 dren of Israel ‘went onward in allt Heb. 
 
 their journeys: 
 
 37 But if the cloud were not taken 
 up, then they journeyed not till the 
 day that it was taken up. 
 
 38 For the cloud of the Lorp was 
 upon the tabernacle by day, and fire 
 was on it by night, in the sight of all 
 the house of Israel, throughout all 
 their journeys. 
 
 33. set up the hanging] put up the 
 curtain. See on xxvi. 36. 
 
 The glory of the Lord is manifested on the 
 completed work. 
 34—38. 
 
 34,35. On the distinction between the 
 Tent as the outer shelter and the Tabernacle as 
 the dwelling-place of Jehovah, which is very 
 clear in these verses, see on xxvi. 1. The glory 
 appeared as a light within and as a cloud on 
 the outside. 
 
 35. Cf. the entrance of the High-priest 
 into the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atone- 
 ment, Lev. xvi. 2, 13. For special appear- 
 ances of this glory in the Tabernacle, see 
 Num. xiv. 10, xvi. 19, 423 cf. Ex. xvi. 10; 
 TI) Ville Toy 11. 
 
 36—38. This is more fully described 
 Num. ix. 15—23, X. II, 12, 34+ 
 
 The Tabernacle, after it had accompanied 
 the Israelites in their wanderings in the wil- 
 derness, was most probably first set up in 
 the Holy Land at Gilgal (Josh, iv. 19, V. Io, 
 ix. 6, x. 6, 43). But before the death of 
 
 journeyed. 
 
es) 
 
 2 
 
 Joshua, it was erected at Shiloh (Josh. xviii. 
 I, xix. 51). Here it remained as the national 
 Sanctuary throughout the time of the Judges 
 (Josh. xvili. 8, xxi. 2, xxii. 19; Judg. xviii. 
 31, xX. ‘n94 FS. 1,93, 1¥. 3)... But its) ex- 
 ternal construction was at this time some- 
 what changed, and doors, strictly so called, 
 had taken the place of the entrance curtain 
 (1 S. ili. 15): hence it seems to have been 
 sometimes called the Temple (1 S.i. 9, iil. 3), 
 the name by which the structure of Solomon 
 was afterwards commonly known. After the 
 
 time of Eli it was removed to Nob in the 
 
 canton of Benjamin, not far from Jerusalem 
 (1 S. xxi, r—9). From thence, in the time 
 of David, it was removed to Gibeon (1 Chro. 
 Xvi, 39, Xxi. 29; 2 Chro. i. 3; 1 K. i. 4, ix, 
 2). It was brought from Gibeon to Jerusa- 
 lem by Solomon (1 K. viii. 4). After this, 
 it disappears in the narrative of Scripture. 
 When the Temple of Solomon was built, ‘‘ the 
 Tabernacle ofthe Tent” had entirely performed 
 its work; it had protected the Ark of the 
 
 NOTE on 
 ON THE SANCTUARY AS A WHOLE. 
 
 I. Zhe Altar and the Tabernacle. J. Names 
 of the Tabernacle. JI. Order of the Sacred 
 things. IV. The Ark and its belongings. 
 V. Allegorical explanations, VI, Origi- 
 nality of the Tabernacle, 
 
 I 
 
 The two chief objects within the Court 
 were the Brazen Altar and the Tabernacle. As 
 sacrificial worship was no new thing, there is 
 nothing said or intimated as to the purpose of 
 the Altar, either in the instructions for the 
 Sanctuary or in the record of its completion}, 
 The intention was merely to provide a single 
 Altar of suitable construction for the offer- 
 ings of the whole nation in such juxtaposition 
 with the Tabernacle as to suit the order of 
 the inspired ritual. 
 
 But the Tabernacle was an entirely new 
 matter belonging to the dispensation of the 
 Mosaic Covenant, Its purpose was therefore 
 distinctly set forth at this time. It was to 
 be the symbolical dwelling-place of Jehovah, 
 where He was to meet with His people or 
 their representatives. His own words were: 
 ‘Let them make me a sanctuary that I may 
 dwell among them,”—‘‘I will meet you, to 
 speak there unto thee, and there will I meet 
 with the Children of Israel?.” 
 
 Il. 
 
 The name most frequently given to the Ta- 
 bernacle in our Version is, ‘‘ The Tabernacle 
 
 1 Ex. xxvii. 1—8, xxxviii. I—7. See note on 
 Ex. xs. Che 
 
 2 Ex. xxv. 8, xxix. 42, 43. See also Ex. xxvii. 
 21, XXVlil. 12, 
 
 ERODES A 
 
 Covenant during the migrations of the people 
 until they were settled in the Land, and the 
 promise was fulfilled, that the Lord would 
 choose out a place for Himself in which His 
 name should be preserved and His service 
 should be maintained (Deut. xii. 14, 21, xiv. 
 24). 
 
 In accordance with its dignity as the most 
 sacred object in. the Sanctuary, the original 
 Ark of the Covenant constructed by Moses 
 was preserved and transferred from the Ta- 
 bernacle to the Temple. ‘The Golden Altar, 
 the Candlestick and the Shewbread table 
 were renewed by Solomon. ‘They were sub- 
 sequently renewed by Zerubbabel, and lastly 
 by the Maccabees (see on xxv, 23). But the 
 Ark was preserved in the Temple until Jeru- 
 salem was taken by the forces of Nebuchad- 
 nezzay .(2 Chro. XXkV. 33 Jer meget 
 was never replaced in the Second ‘Temple. 
 (Jos. ‘ Bell. Jud.’ v. 5. § 5; Tacitus, ‘ Hist.’ 
 v. 9). . According to a rabbinical tradition, 
 its place was occupied by a block of stone. 
 
 Cuap. XL. 
 
 (or Tent*) of the congregation’.” But the 
 latter word in Hebrew (7119) signifies meeting, 
 in its most general sense, and is always used 
 without the article. The better rendering of 
 the name is The Tabernacle (or The Tent) 
 of meeting, and the idea connected with it is 
 that of Jehovah meeting with either Moses, or 
 the priests, or (in only a few cases?) with the 
 people gathered into a congregation at the 
 entrance of the Tent. The English translation 
 is not supported by the old Versions, nor by 
 the best critical authorities. ‘The complete 
 designation is given as ‘‘the Tabernacle of the 
 Tent of meeting.” Ex. xl. 1,29, &c. - 
 The Tabernacle is also called, The Taber- 
 nacle (or The Tent) of the Testimony, 
 Now this designation evidently relates to the 
 Tabernacle as the depository: of the Testi- 
 mony’, that is, the Tables of the Law, It 
 has been preferred by the LXX. (9 oxnvy 
 Tov paprvptov) and the Vulgate (tabernaculum 
 testimonii), to render not only the Hebrew, 
 which strictly answers to it, but also the 
 name in more common use, which means The 
 Tabernacle of meeting. It occurs in the 
 New Testament, Acts vii, 44; Rev, xv. 5. 
 
 3 On the words Zabernacle and Tent, in some 
 cases used indifferently for the whole structure, 
 see ON XXVl. I. 
 
 4 Ex. xxvii. 21, xxviii. 43, xxix. 4, IO, FE, 30; 
 xxx. 16, 18, 20, 36, xxxi. 7, xxxv. 21, xl. 2, 6, 7, 
 123° Lévy. is 15:3, 6, ocean 
 
 5 Lev. viii. 3, 4; Num, x. 3:3) chee ge 
 
 ° The Hebrew word (1) TY), inthis connection, 
 always has the article. Ex. xxxviii. 21; Num. i. 
 50, 53, ix. ‘f5,X. 11, XVil, 7,0) vane 
 
 7 See Note on Ex. xx. 1—17, § V. 
 
EXODUS: XL, 
 
 The second name, of itself, suggests that 
 the Tabernacle owed its character and sig- 
 nificance to the Ark with its sacred contents 
 and the Mercy-seat that covered it, Above 
 the Mercy-seat, in a concentrated sense, was 
 the spot where Jehovah communed with His 
 people’, The furniture of the Holy Place 
 held a subordinate position, and all its symbol- 
 ism pointed to the truth which had its deepest 
 and fullest expression in the Ark. In the form 
 and materials of the Tabernacle itself there 
 appears to have been nothing, either in its 
 wood-work or its curtains, but what was 
 most convenient for the arrangement and pro- 
 tection of the holy things and most becoming 
 for beauty, It was in fact a regal Tent2, in 
 which the Ark symbolized the constant pre- 
 sence of Jehovah, who now condescended to 
 dwell amongst the people whom He had re- 
 deemed, 
 
 ill. 
 
 The order in which the chief facts con- 
 nected with the construction of the Sanctuary 
 are related in the sacred narrative, closely 
 corresponds with the essential relation in which 
 the several parts stand to each other. The 
 Ten Commandments are uttered by the voice 
 of Jehovah fromm the summit of Mount Sinai, 
 with every circumstance that can show their 
 solemn importance*: a short practical com- 
 pendium of the Law, called the Book of the 
 Covenant‘, is written out by Moses for the 
 occasion; after the Covenant is sealed by 
 sprinkling on the people the blood of Burnt- 
 offerings and Peace-offerings, a mysterious 
 manifestation of the Divine presence is made 
 to Moses, Aaron and the Elders®: Moses is 
 then summoned to the Mount and receives 
 instructions first for making the Ark that was 
 to contain the tables of the —Ten Command- 
 ments with the Mercy-seat that was to cover 
 them ®, next for the holy things that were to be 
 placed in the Holy Place, and not till then, 
 for the Tabernacle with its Tent and its 
 Covering’: after this, the Brazen Altar and 
 the Court are described*, and directions are 
 given for the consecration of those who had 
 to minister at the Altar and the ‘Tabernacle ?: 
 what may be regarded as a supplementary 
 section relating to the Golden Altar-* and 
 some other things, is followed by the appoint- 
 ment of the workmen and a repetition of 
 
 AVIEX. RXV 224 
 
 2 See Note on chap, xxvi, 
 
 oy KIX, KX. 
 
 4 See on Ex. xx. 22. 
 
 5 Ex, xxiv. According to the Epistle to tke 
 Hebrews, the Book was sprinkled as well as the 
 people; see Heb. ix. 19. 
 
 6 See on Ex. xxv. 1o—16, 
 
 7 See Note on Ex, xxvi. 
 
 8 Ex. xxvii. 
 
 9 Ex, xxviii, xxix, 
 
 10 See on Ex. xxx. I, 
 
 Mile 1, 
 
 the Law for the observance of the Sabbath- 
 day’, These practical instructions being com- 
 pleted, the precious gift of the Tables of the 
 Law is put into the hands of Moses’, This 
 arrangement of the particulars is the more 
 noticeable, because the articles are named in 
 reversed order in the account of the construc- 
 tion of the work3, 
 
 IV, 
 
 The Ten Commar.dments conveyed no new 
 revelation in the details of their subject matter, 
 Every duty enjoined in them may be found 
 expressed in no obscure terms in the earlier 
 portion of the Pentateuch, But the old truths 
 were now for the first time embodied and 
 proclaimed to the people in connection with 
 their lately recovered freedom, Hence they 
 were put into new relations with other truths, 
 and were combined with them in expressing 
 the will of Jehovah, The tables of the Testi- 
 mony did not however, by themselves, form the 
 central point of the Sanctuary. It required the 
 complete Ark that contained them, with the 
 Mercy-seat that covered them, to convey the 
 true meaning of the Covenant that was based 
 on the name of Jehovah as it was revealed to 
 Moses4, 
 
 We may regard then the sacred contents 
 of the Tabernacle as figuring what was pecu- 
 liar to the Covenant of which Moses was the 
 Mediator, the closer union of God with Israel _ 
 and their consequent election as ‘‘a kingdom 
 of priests, an holy nation®:” while the Brazen 
 Altar in the Court not only bore witness for 
 the old sacrificial worship by which the Patri- 
 archs had drawn nigh to God, but formed an 
 essential part of the Sanctuary, signifying, by 
 its now more fully developed system of Sacri- 
 fices® in connection with the Tabernacle, those 
 ideas of Sin and Atonement, which were 
 first distinctly brought out by the revelation 
 of the Law and the sanctification of the 
 nation’, 
 
 V. 
 
 Keeping strictly to the conclusions that 
 appear .clearly to follow from the sacred narra- 
 tive, there seems to be neither occasion nor 
 place for those allegorical explanations of the 
 Tabernacle which are so often found in com- 
 mentators, both Jewish and Christian, Philo’, 
 Josephus®, Theodoret!, Jerome, with other 
 Fathers, and some of the Rabbinists, supposed 
 
 1 Ex. xxxi. 1—1r7, PSS ARSE Te 
 
 3 Ex, xxxvi, XXXvii. 
 
 4 Ex. xxxiv. 6, 7, See Note on ch, xx. § VI. 
 STK X1Ke Ob 
 
 © See Lev. i.—vii. 
 7 See notes on Lev. iv. 
 8 
 
 ‘Vit. Mos.* 111. 6. 
 et Ant 11. 7.7. Cf ‘Bel. Jud2-y, gS 
 where the same explanation is applied to the 
 
 Temple. 
 10 ‘Quest. in Exod.’ Co. 
 11 ‘Epist.’ LXIV. § 9. 
 
 433 
 
A 
 
 ae EXODUS. XL. 
 
 that the structure was a type of the material 
 
 “universe of heaven and earth which the Lord 
 
 had created as an abode for Himself. It 
 appears however that no two of these writers 
 agree together in the application of this theory 
 to the several parts. Biahr?, following in this 
 
 ‘general track, has elaborated with curious in- 
 
 genuity an explanation of almost every recorded 
 particular in the description of Moses,—In 
 
 other lines of speculation, the Tabernacle has 
 
 been taken as a symbol of human nature 
 (Luther), and as a prophetic type of the 
 Christian Church (Cocceius). 
 
 VI. 
 
 It has been usual, especially since the time 
 of Spencer, to seek out parallels from heathen 
 antiquity for the Tabernacle itself, but more 
 
 ‘particularly for the Ark of the Covenant. 
 
 The Tabernacle has been compared with 
 several moveable temples of which there are 
 notices in ancient writers, the most remarkable 
 of which seems to be “the Sacred Tent” (7 
 iepa oxnvn) of the Carthaginians mentioned by 
 Diodorus?, 
 
 The Ark of the Covenant has been most 
 generally likened to the arks, or moveable 
 shrines, which are represented on Egyptian 
 monuments’. The Egyptian arks were carried 
 in a similar manner by poles resting on men’s 
 shoulders, and some of them had on the cover 
 two winged figures not unlike what we con- 
 ceive the golden Cherubim to have been, 
 Thus far the similarity is striking. But 
 there were points of great dissimilarity. Be- 
 tween the winged figures on the Egyptian 
 arks there was placed the material symbol 
 of a deity, and the arks themselves were 
 carried about in religious processions, so as 
 to make a show in the eyes of the people. 
 We know not what they contained. As re- 
 gards the Ark of the Covenant, the absence 
 of any symbol of God was one of its great 
 characteristics. It was never carried in a cere- 
 monial procession: when it was moved from 
 one place to another, it was closely packed up, 
 concealed from the eyes even of the Levites 
 who bore it4. When the Tabernacle was 
 pitched, the Ark was never exhibited, but was 
 
 1 “<Symbolik,’ Vol. 1. p. 75. 
 
 2 Lib. xx. 65: others are mentioned by Knobel. 
 
 3 Wilkinson, ‘Pop. Acc.’ Vol. I. p. 267.—The 
 articles in Smith's and Kitto’s Dictionaries. — 
 Smith, ‘The Pentateuch,’ p. 260, &c. &c.—On 
 the arks of other ancient nations, see Bahr, 
 *Symbolik,’ Vol. 1. 399, and Knobel, p. 262. 
 
 # Num. iv. 5, 6, 1g, 20. 
 
 -kept in solemn darkness. 
 
 Rest, it is evident, 
 was its appointed condition. It was occasion- 
 ally moved out of its place in the Holy of 
 Holies, but only as long as the nation was 
 without a settled capital, and had something 
 of the character of an army on the march. 
 During this period it accompanied the army 
 on several occasions!, But it had been fore- 
 
 -told that the time should come when the 
 
 Sanctuary was to be fixed?, and when this 
 was fulfilled, we are told that ‘‘the Ark had 
 rest®,” It was never again moved till the 
 capture of Jerusalem by the forces of Nebu- 
 chadnezzar*. Not less, we may fairly sup- 
 pose, was it distinguished from all other arks 
 in the simple grandeur of its purpose: it was 
 constructed to contain the plain text of the 
 Ten Commandments written on stone in 
 words that were intelligible to all, 
 
 Such resemblances to foreign patterns as 
 have been mentioned are without doubt 
 interesting; but it should always be kept 
 in view that they are extremely superficial. 
 The Israelites could hardly have been in 
 contact with the Egyptians for so long 
 a period without learning much of their arts 
 and customs, It is most likely that they were 
 in the habit of using the same tools and modes 
 of construction. In order to attain a given 
 
 end they probably used similar mechanical 
 
 contrivances, There are certain points of 
 likeness in the descriptions of Moses and 
 what we know of Egyptian art, which would 
 clearly prove that the Israelites had dwelt in 
 Egypt®. But on the whole, it seems wonderful 
 that there is so little in the Sanctuary to remind 
 us of any foreign association, Besides such dis- 
 tinctions as might naturally be ascribed to the 
 difference between an idol’s temple and a 
 structure meant to express the Covenant be- 
 tween the unseen Lord and His people, there 
 
 is in the Tabernacle an originality, both in its 
 
 general arrangement and in its details, which 
 is by far more striking than any resemblance 
 that may be traced between it and heathen 
 models. 
 
 1 1» S. iv. 9; xiv. 183 es 
 
 2 Deut. xii. 1c, 11. 
 
 5.4.Chro. vi. 31 3.-0f oxygens 
 
 + See concluding note on Exod. xl.—It is 
 strange that Knobel and others should regard 
 such occasions as are described Josh. vi. 8, 
 2S. vi. 12—16, as of the nature of a it 
 processions. 
 
 ° Hengstenberg has not stated the. avraraent 
 too confidently i in his ‘Egypt and the Books of 
 Moses,’ but he has certainly brought some yery 
 fanciful instances to its support. 
 
BOOM DATS VAY xX Vilas XX 
 
 NOTE ON THE ROUTE OF THE ISRAELITES 
 
 FROM 
 Rupes LO: SINAT. Fy.C. GC, 
 
 (Cars. XVI. XVII. XIX.) 
 
 The commentary on the first nineteen brought the Israelites from Rameses to Etham. 
 chapters of Exodus had been some time in Rameses was the general name of the district 
 print, when the results of the survey of the in the time of Jacob; the principal city built 
 
 western districts of the Sinaitic peninsula were by the Israelites was probably situate on the 
 communicated to the writer. Some conclu- 
 
 ancient canal at some distance from the fron- 
 sions to which he had been led by the re- tier, Etham was on the edge of the wilder- 
 searches of travellers, of which the fullest 
 
 ness, at the point where the road towards 
 account is given in Ritter’s work on Sinai and_ Palestine branched off; and the direction of 
 
 Palestine (see Band 1. p. 517-638), were mate- the journey was turned southwards, towards 
 rially affected by the information which he the encampment by the sea at Baal-zephon. 
 received from Captain Wilson, of the Royal See xii. 37, xiii. 20, xiv. 2, 3. Etham, which 
 Engineers, who with Captain Palmer, R. E., is probably identical with Pithom, is held 
 
 conducted the survey, and from the Rev. F. by the writer of this note to correspond to 
 W. Holland, who accompanied the expedition, 
 
 the ancient Heroopolis, the frontier city of 
 
 and had previously spent much time in ex- Egypt, near the southern extremity of Lake 
 ploring the Peninsula, of which he has pre- Timsah. ‘The journey from this place to 
 pared a valuable map, published by the Geo- Suez would occupy sufficient time for a com- 
 graphical Society. munication to be made to Pharaoh, and for 
 
 The first part of the route, from Rameses_ the rapid march of his army!. ‘The Israelites 
 to Elim, is not affected by these new sources 
 of information, and the notes remain un- 1 The subjoined sketch, prepared by the Rey. 
 touched. It may, however, be convenient to Clark, shows the route of the Israelites from 
 touch briefly on this portion in order to pre- Rameses to ‘Aytin Misa, and the probable ex- 
 sent a clear and connected view of the circum- tent of the Red Sea north of its present bed in 
 stances which may have determined the direc- 
 
 : the time of Moses. Mr Clark identifies Etham 
 tion of the march. ‘The first two days’ march with a spot near Serapeum. 
 
 d 
 2 o 
 E 
 Zt 
 BS 
 ; 
 E 
 BE) 
 yO 
 b 
 =the 
 = 
 pf 
 = 
 | 
 a 
 A, 
 io 
 = 
 E 
 2 
 z Lrhahirotho ea 
 . Migdolo “EBA 45 
 a ope=a Ayn 
 — Baalzephon afi 
 2 
 eB 
 \= 2 
 
 435 
 
4 
 
 a 
 
 re) 
 
 6 EES O10, 
 
 must have had a considerable start in order to 
 reach the encampment of Suez before they were 
 overtaken, but they could scarcely have been so 
 near to Suez when at Etham as the site fixed 
 upon by Robinson would bring them, or the 
 passage could have been effected without inter- 
 ruption. That passage took place, as nearly all 
 modern critics admit, near Suez, where sands of 
 considerable extent were passable when ‘the 
 Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east 
 wind,” which blew all the night; see c. xiv. 21. 
 After crossing the sea the Israelites would 
 naturally make their first station at ‘Ayan 
 Misa, where they would find an ample sup- 
 ply of water: passing thence by Marah they 
 reached Elim, when they encamped under the 
 palm-trees, by the waters. Elim is generally 
 identified with the Wady Gharandel. It is pro- 
 bable that the Israelites remained there several 
 days and then advanced to the station on the 
 Red Sea, near the headland called Ras-Selima, 
 or, as in the map, Ras Abu Zenimeh. 
 
 The difference of opinions as to the course 
 pursued by the Israelites up to this point is 
 limited to questions of secondary importance ; 
 but from Elim two principal routes lead to 
 Sinai, one by El Markha and Wady Feiran, 
 the other, less circuitous, through a succession 
 of Wadys on the north-east. Both these 
 routes are reported by Captain Wilson, R.E. 
 to be practicable even for a large host like that 
 of the Israelites: the former is the more easy 
 of transit ; the latter has the advantage of an 
 abundant supply of excellent water at the 
 beginning of the journey. At the one end 
 of the route it may be regarded as settled 
 that the station by Ras-Selima was the start- 
 ing-point, if not for the whole host, yet for 
 the head-quarters of the Israelites. At the 
 other extremity the reasons which will be ad- 
 duced appear to prove that Ras Sufsafeh was 
 the summit from which the Law was delivered, 
 and the Wady er Rahah the wilderness of Sinai 
 on which the people were assembled to hear it. 
 
 The facts stated in Exodus and in the itine- 
 rary in Numbers xxxiii. are these. ‘The first 
 station was in the wilderness of Sin, which 
 lay between Elim and Sinai, The people re- 
 mained there some days: we find no com- 
 plaint of want of water, but they suffered 
 from want of food, and were supplied first 
 with quails and then with manna. From 
 this wilderness they advanced, encamping first 
 at Dophkah, then at Alush; thence they went 
 to Rephidim, where they found no water until 
 it was supplied by a miracle from the rock of 
 Horeb. At Rephidim they were attacked by 
 the Amalekites. ‘Their next encampment was 
 in the wilderness of Sinai. Some fifteen days 
 elapsed between the first encampment in the 
 wilderness of Sin and their arrival at the 
 Mount of God: compare xvi. 1, and xix. 1. 
 
 We may first consider the claims of the 
 more direct route, advocated with great ability 
 
 _by Knobel, whose view has been adopted by 
 
 VEE, 
 
 XV Ly ooh 
 
 Keil, and is accepted in the foot-notes of th’s 
 commentary. It has been fully described by 
 Burckhardt, Robinson and other travellers, 
 whose accounts are generally corroborated by 
 Captains Wilson and Palmer and by Mr 
 Holland. 
 
 From Ras Abu Zenimeh this route passes 
 through several Wadys to a wide undulating 
 plain, the Debbet er Ramleh. ‘This desert is 
 identified by Knobel with the wilderness of Sin. 
 It corresponds in many striking particulars 
 with the accounts of that wilderness: bare, 
 wild, and desolate, it would offer no refresh- 
 ment to the Israelites after their first long and 
 laborious march. It lies, properly speaking, 
 between Elim and the Sinaitic grcup in which 
 greenstone and porphyry take the place of the 
 sandstone of the desert, ‘The word Debbet 
 moreover corresponds exactly in meaning to 
 Sin!; and at Wady Nasb, the first station on 
 this route, there is a copious supply of water: a 
 circumstance which, combined with the supply 
 of quails and manna, gives a probable reason 
 for the delay of some days in this wilderness. 
 From Wady Nasb the road passes by Sarabit 
 el Khadim. At this place the Egyptians work- 
 ed mines of great extent, and the remains of 
 buildings with numerous inscriptions prove 
 that it was occupied by an Egyptian colony 
 before the time of Moses. ‘The existence of 
 this settlement presents conflicting arguments 
 for and against the selection of this route by 
 Moses. On the one hand it may be reasoned 
 that he would avoid coming into contact with 
 Egyptians, especially since this must have 
 been a military station, and a conflict would 
 seem inevitable, since the sojourn in the dis- 
 trict extended over some days. On the other 
 hand it is admitted that the Egyptians would 
 keep the entire route from Ras Selima in good 
 order, and take great care to protect the 
 sources of water: nor considering that the 
 whole colony, as Captain Wilson states, could 
 not consist of more than rooo men, is it at all 
 probable that they would attempt to arrest 
 the advance of the vast host of the Israelites; 
 especially if, as may be assumed, they had res 
 ceived information of the destruction of Pha- 
 raoh’s host in the Red Sea. 
 
 ‘The road from Sarabit el Khadim is extreme- 
 ly rough; but, as military authorities affirm, 
 not impracticable even for light waggons, such 
 as the Israelites probably used. Dophkah is 
 assumed by Knobel to be in the Wady Sih, 
 both names having the same meaning”, Alush, 
 
 1 Freytag, in his Arabic lexicon, s.v. explains 
 the former to mean ‘‘ arena zequabilis et plana,” 
 the latter Sin, or Sinin, “‘arena elatior et longius 
 protensa per regionis superficiem,” a most exact 
 description of this district. 
 
 2 gids, sih, flowing waters, the same bes 
 ing the meaning of ($8), da/aka, from which 
 
 MpDT was probably derived, 
 
hy, 
 
 Be 
 
 BR IO Ue eae Vil grees Velie, Ds DX, 437 
 
 SI EL CH SMaeP 
 
 OF PART OF THE 
 
 FENINSULA OF SINAI 
 
 FROM THE ORDNANCE SURVEY 
 MADE IN 1868, 18609, 
 BY 
 
 Carts. WILSON & PALMER, 
 
 ROYAL ENGINEERS, 
 (Scale 16 statute miles to 1 inch.) 
 
 CSS 
 WTBIYAR 
 
 we 
 
 \ 
 
 . 
 a 
 
 Zz 
 = WW 
 
 AN 
 pe 
 
 ANY fs 
 Wy > 
 7 p84 
 WMO 
 WS 
 
 S =; 
 
 MSS 
 CS Wi 
 
 BIS 
 
 SS 
 
 SS) 
 
 aif! 
 4 \ 
 Zar d \ 
 
 NS 
 
 f 
 
 WIs 
 
 S S 
 NSF, SS 
 \ WA AN \ 
 
 i, is \\ \ 
 Na Y4\'\ i \ 
 NM 
 \\ 
 
 Country through which the Israelites must have passed on their way to Mount Sinai. 
 
438 
 
 according to the same critic, may be the 
 Wady el ‘Esh, where there is a spring of good 
 water: a journey of two hours from this 
 point ends in the Wady es Sheikh. 
 
 ‘The correspondence of the sites and even of 
 the names on this route, and of the circum- 
 stances of the journey, presents a strong if not 
 conclusive argument in its favour, nor is the 
 argument affected by any discoveries made in 
 the late survey. ‘The notes on the text are 
 therefore left in their original form ; the writer 
 still retaining, though with some diffidence in 
 face of the opinions of the explorers, his con- 
 viction that Knobel is right, so far as this 
 part of the route is concerned. 
 
 We have now to consider the other main 
 route. The first day’s journey from Ras Abu 
 Zenimeh southwards leads through a narrow 
 slip of barren sand to the open plain of 
 Fl] Markha. From this a Wady at once 
 opens on the east, leading to the Wady 
 Feiran. This route is most unlikely to have 
 been selected by the Israelites: it would have 
 brought them into contact with Egyptians in 
 a district occupied by that people for cen- 
 turies, nor do the narrow passes present any 
 features corresponding to the wilderness of 
 Sin. On the south, however, a very even and 
 tolerably wide tract of desert land extends 
 through El] Markha, and at its southern ex- 
 tremity, by a sudden turn eastwards, through 
 the Wady Feiran just described, ‘This 
 tract is identified by the conductors of the 
 survey and by Mr Holland with the wilderness 
 of Sin. They consider it to be the route 
 which Moses would naturally have followed 
 having once reached the station by Ras Se- 
 lima. ‘The chief objection to this view is that 
 there are no springs of water in the district; to 
 which it is answered that the Israelites who 
 had waggons (see Num. vii. 3) and oxen would 
 of course bring with them a supply, which 
 might suffice for a rapid march until they 
 reached the upper part of the Wady Feiran. 
 The march however was not rapid, since there 
 was a considerable delay, probably a whole 
 week, in the wilderness of Sin. ‘The route 
 then passes north east of Mount Serbal, till 
 it meets the Wady Sheikh, from which point 
 two routes lead to Er Rahah and Ras-Suf- 
 safeh ; the one direct, but rough at the upper 
 end; the other circuitous, but well adapted 
 for the march and encampment of the Israel- 
 ites. In Wady es Sheikh about midway this 
 route meets the upper route previously de- 
 scribed. 
 
 The question on which the explorers differ 
 is one of great importance. It touches the 
 site of Rephidim, where the Israelites first 
 suffered for want of water, and where they 
 defeated the Amalekites. Captains Wilson 
 and Palmer hold that the battle was fought in 
 the Wady Feiran, under Mount Serbal. Mr. 
 Holland places Rephidim at the pass of Al 
 Watiyeh, at the eastern end of Wady es 
 
 BEX-ODUS/“X4 VE oo Mey tie ies 
 
 Sheikh, to the north of the point where it- 
 joins the Wady ed Deir, which leads to 
 Sinai. , 
 If indeed the Israelites passed through 
 Wady Feiran, it seems improbable that they 
 should not have come into collision with 
 the natives. From El] Hesweh it is a well- 
 watered district, winding for a considerable 
 distance through defiles which could be easily 
 defended by a people who had been trained 
 for warfare by centuries of fierce struggles 
 with the Egyptians: on the adjoining high- 
 lands towards Jebel Serbal remains of curious 
 buildings, which undoubtedly belong to a 
 very ancient period, still attest the presence of 
 a numerous population along this route!. The 
 site of the battle with the Amalekites is fixed by 
 Captain Wilson near the ancient city of Feiran. 
 The hill on which Moses witnessed the combat 
 is supposed by Dr Stanley, ‘S. and P.’ p. 41, 
 to be the rocky eminence which commands 
 the palm-grove, on which in early Christian 
 times stood the church and palace of the 
 bishops of Paran. Captain Wilson holds it 
 to be the Jebel Tahtneh, on the opposite 
 side of the Wady. ‘The whole of the Wady 
 Feiran may have been cleared of the Ama- 
 lekites by the decisive victory; after which : 
 the Israelites halted some time, with their 
 head-quarters under the palm-groves, when 
 they were visited by Jethro. This view 
 assumes the identification of the Mount of 
 God where Moses encamped in the wilder- 
 ness, C. Xvill. 5, with Mount Serbal, a con- 
 jecture of Ritter’s which seems open to 
 grave objection, since the Mount of God in 
 Exodus is in all probability the group of 
 Sinai, and the term ‘‘ wilderness” is scarcely ap- 
 plicable to the palm-groves of Feiran. From 
 this place the Israelites might have proceeded 
 to the Wady er Rahah, either by Wady es 
 Sheikh, the longer route, but presenting no 
 impediments; or by the W. Solaf, which 
 though rugged in part is not impracticable, 
 and in Captain Wilson’s opinion would most 
 probably have been pursued. 
 Mr Holland, on the other hand, believes © 
 that the Israelites passed through the Wady 
 Feiran without encountering opposition, and 
 that they then traversed the Wady es Sheikh; 
 Rephidim he places at the pass, called El 
 
 1 Mr Holland describes them in a paper read 
 at the Church Congress, 1869. After careful 
 examination he came to the conclusion that they 
 were probably the tombs and store-houses of the 
 ancient Amalekites. They evidently were the 
 work of a large and powerful people who inha- 
 bited the peninsula at a very early period. There 
 are indications that they were, to some extent, 
 an agricultural, as well as a pastoral people, a 
 point of great importance in its bearings upon 
 the probable condition of the neighbourhood of 
 Mount Sinai at the time of the Exodus. See In- 
 troduction, p. 245. The Egyptian names of the 
 old inhabitants were Anu and Mentu. 
 
Bee) DI SY FAN Tee EX 
 
 7 5 432 
 
 Group of Mount Sinai from the Ordnance Survey La 
 
 Watiyeh; it is shut in by perpendicular 
 rocks on either side. The Amalekites hold- 
 ing this defile would be in a position of 
 great strength: and their choice of this 
 point for the attack is well accounted for, 
 supposing the Israelites to have reached it 
 without previous molestation. It commands 
 the entrance to the Wadys surrounding the 
 central group of Sinai, on and about which 
 the Bedouins pasture their flocks during the 
 summer. All the requirements of the nar- 
 rative appear to be satisfied by this assump- 
 tion. On the north is a large plain desti- 
 tute of water for the encampment of the 
 Israelites; there is a conspicuous hill to the 
 north of the defile commanding the battle- 
 
 1 The engravings which accompany this note 
 were supplied by General Sir Henry James, 
 F.R.S. 
 
 The first is an accurate representation of a 
 raised model of that group, together with the 
 adjoining Wadys, which is at the Topographical 
 department. The model is on the scale of six 
 
 field, presenting a bare cliff, such as we may 
 suppose the rock to have been which Moses 
 struck with his rod. On the south of the 
 pass is another plain sufficient for the en- 
 campment of the Amalekites, within easy 
 reach of an abundant supply of water. At 
 the foot of the hill on which Moses most 
 probably sat, if this be Rephidim, the Arabs | 
 point out a rock, which they call ‘‘ the seat 
 of the prophet Moses.” 
 
 Taking all points into consideration we feel 
 constrained to adopt one of the following alter- 
 natives. If, as the explorers hold, the Israelites 
 passed through the Wady Feiran, the conflict 
 with the Amalekites must have taken place 
 on the spot fixed upon by Captains Wilson 
 
 inches to the mile, and represents the natural 
 features in their true proportions. 
 
 The other is taken from a photograph, which 
 represents the northern end of the Sinaitic 
 group, with Ras-Sufsafeh in the centre, and: 
 the extensive plain of the Wady Rahah in 
 front. , 
 
 439, 
 
440 
 
 and Palmer. If however the battle field was 
 at E] Watiyeh the Israelites may have reached 
 it by the upper route, which meets the lower 
 about midway in the Wady es Sheikh. ‘The 
 arguments appear to the writer to preponderate 
 in favour of this view, which accepts all the 
 facts ascertained by the Expedition of Survey, 
 and presents a series of coincidences of great 
 weight in the settlement of the question. 
 
 From this point the writer accepts without 
 hesitation the conclusion to which all the 
 persons concerned in the Survey unanimously 
 arrive touching the encampment of the Is- 
 raelites in the wilderness of Sinai. ‘The re- 
 presentation of the Sinaitic group here given 
 will enable the reader to judge of the weight of 
 the arguments which led to that conclusion. 
 
 The opinion which formerly appeared to 
 the writer to be sustained by the strongest 
 evidence identified Jebel Musa with the peak 
 of Sinai. This view was advocated by Ritter. 
 He supposed that on the south of Jebel Musa 
 there 1s a plain of great extent, the Wady 
 Sebaiyeh, in which the Israelites could as- 
 semble in front of the mount. The pyra- 
 midal height of Jebel Musa is described as 
 rising over it like a monolithic wall of granite, 
 a sheer precipice of 2000 feet ; on the summit 
 the mosque, the Christian chapel, and even 
 the so-called stone of Moses, are seen dis- 
 tinctly from the plain; which Wellsted, Vol. 
 II. p. 34, describes in terms which might have 
 seemed conclusive. 
 
 ‘‘ We crossed a large plain terminating 
 in a broad and extensive valley. It has been 
 objected to the identification of Jebel Musa 
 with Mount Sinai, that the narrow valleys 
 and ravines contiguous to it could not have 
 contained the immense multitude of Israel- 
 ites. In this valley however there is more 
 than ample space for them: while at the same 
 time at its termination Mount Sinai stands 
 forth in naked majesty.” A traveller who 
 spent some time in the neighbourhood lately 
 informed the writer of this note that the 
 description is quite accurate, and that it is 
 the only plain where the host could have 
 been assembled. Tischendorf, who notices 
 the extent of the plain, specially adapted for 
 so great an event, observes that ‘‘ the situation 
 supplies an excellent illustration of the words 
 in Cc. xix. 12, ‘that ye go not up unto the 
 mount, nor touch the border of it;’ for in 
 this plain the mountain can be touched in the 
 literal sense, rising sheer from the plain, stand- 
 ing before the eye from base to summit as a 
 whole;” and again, ‘‘Seldom could one so 
 properly be said to stand at the nether part 
 of the mount as in the plain at the foot of 
 Sinai looking upwards to the granite summit 
 2000 feet hizh.” 
 
 The view of Jebel Musa is admitted to be 
 singularly striking. Lepsius says of the ascent 
 that it lies between vast heights and rocks of 
 the wildest and grandest character, giving the 
 
 PMO DADS RY 
 
 XV TALS 
 
 impression of an approach to a spot of his- 
 torical interest. ‘The ascent from the chapel 
 of Elijah occupies about three-quarters of an 
 hour to the summit, a height of 7,530to 7,548 
 feet. On the top is a level space 70 or 80 feet 
 in width. ‘Travellers give different accounts 
 of the view from this spot. Seetzen and 
 Burckhardt could see nothing; when they 
 visited it the whole district was covered with 
 a dense mist. Robinson speaks slightingly of 
 the effect: and Ruppell says that the view is 
 shut in by higher mountains on all sides except 
 the north, on which he looked over a vast 
 expanse including the desert of Er Ramleh, 
 which is identified in these notes with the 
 wilderness of Sin. Wellsted, however, who ex- 
 plored the district with unusual care, gives a 
 most impressive description of the view. Vol. 
 I. p.97. He ascended the mount in very clear 
 weather in January 1833, and took accurate 
 trigonometrical measurements over an extent of 
 go miles, ‘‘The view comprehends a vast circle. 
 The gulphs of Suez and Akaba were distinctly 
 visible, and from the dark blue waters of the 
 latter the island of ‘Tiran, sacred to Isis, rears 
 itself, Mount Agrib on the other side points 
 to the land of bondage. Before me is St Ca- 
 therine, its bare conical peak now capped with 
 snow, In magnificence and striking effect few 
 parts of the world can surpass the wild naked 
 scenery everywhere met with in the mountain- 
 chain which girds the sea-coast of Arabia. 
 Several years wholly passed in cruising along 
 its shores have rendered all its varieties fami- 
 liar to me, but I trace no resemblance to any 
 other in that before me: it has a character of 
 its own. Mount Sinai itself and the hills 
 which compose the district in its immediate 
 vicinity, rise in sharp, isolated conical peaks. 
 From their steep and shattered sides huge masses 
 have been splintered, leaving fissures rather 
 than valleys between their remaining portions. 
 These form the highest part of the range of 
 mountains that, spread over the peninsula, are 
 very generally in the winter months covered 
 with snow, the melting of which occasions 
 the torrents which everywhere devastate the 
 plains below. ‘The peculiarities of its conical 
 formation render this district yet more distinct 
 from the adjoining heights which appear in 
 successive ridges beyond it, while the valleys 
 between them are so narrow that they can 
 scarcely be perceived. No villages and castles. 
 as in Europe here animate the picture: no 
 forests, lakes, or falls of water break the silence 
 and monotony of the scene, All has the ap- 
 pearance of a vast and desolate wilderness 
 either grey, or darkly brown, or wholly black. 
 Few who stand on the summit of Mount 
 Sinai, and gaze from its fearful height upon 
 the dreary wilderness below, will fail to be 
 impressed with the fitness of the whole scene 
 for the sublime and awful dispensation, which 
 an almost universal tradition declares to have 
 been revealed there.” Schubert’s description, 
 
pe CO IONT Se eV Ee, NATO TX, 44] 
 
 WMT) ly 
 
 quoted by Ritter, ‘Sinai,’ p. 587, fully corrobo- ? 
 rates this account. ‘The summit of the mount HAA 
 was reached, a holy place to the mightier half 
 of the nations of the earth, to Jews, Moslems 
 and Christians. ‘The view from its height of 
 4000 feet extends over a circle of more than 
 360 miles in diameter, and 1600 miles in cir- 
 cumference: a rugged outline of a desert 
 panorama of terrible beauty under the blue 
 vault of the purest and brightest heaven of 
 Arabia. No other place comes near to it in 
 all this. On the east and west the eye catches 
 glimpses of the girdle of sea which encircles 
 the highlands of the Peninsula: beyond it are AA 
 seen the ranges of Arabian and Egyptian ! 
 heights. In the space between no green il 
 meadow, no cultivated field, no wood, no | 
 brook, no village, no Alpine hut. Only storm | 
 and thunder resound in the wilderness of 
 Sinai, else for ever silent: a chain of rock 
 standing as on the third day of creation when HA 
 as yet there was no grass, no tree upon the AAA AT 
 earth: a mass of granite, unmingled with later |! | 
 formations; none of its abrupt deep ravines 
 are filled up with sandstone, or chalk, or other 
 alluvial deposits: strata of Greywacke and Ba- 
 salt run like black veins for leagues through 
 its walls and peaks. Here on such a spot as 
 this was the law given, which pointed to Christ 
 by whom it was fulfilled.” 
 
 The accuracy of these descriptions is borne 
 out by the accounts of other travellers. Thus 
 Henniker quoted by Dr Stanley, ‘S. P.’ p. 12: 
 ‘*The view from Jebel Musa (where the par- 
 ticular aspect of the infinite complication of 
 jagged peaks and varied ridges is seen with the 
 greatest perfection) is as if Arabia Petraea were 
 an ocean of lava, which, whilst its waves were 
 running mountains high, had suddenly stood _ |!!/////!)/||') 
 still.” AAT 
 
 Unfortunately for this hypothesis the raised WGA 
 model, from which the plan is taken, proves 
 that the valley immediately below Jebel Musa 
 could not have held a considerable portion of A 
 the Israelites; it is, as Dean Stanley describes | 
 it, rough, uneven, and narrow. It is proved, Mh 
 moreover, that there is no level plain in the | 
 Wady Sebaiyeh on which the Israelites could 
 be assembled within sight of the summit of 
 Jebel Musa, which however is visible at 
 many points between the entrance of the A 
 Wady (which lies to the south-east) and its | 
 farthest end, a distance of nearly seven miles. 
 This circumstance, which rests on the au- 
 thority of military surveyors, seems con- 
 clusive. Jebel Musa, the loftiest and grandest 
 summit of the group, may have been included 
 in the tremendous manifestations of divine 
 power, but the announcement of the Law must 
 have taken place elsewhere. 
 
 On the northern extremity however there 
 is a concurrence of circumstances in favour of 
 Ras Sufsafeh. At its foot lies the plain Wady HAN 
 ed Deir extending to the north-east, meet- Ma 
 ing the Wady es Sheikh, which has been above 
 
 The foreground is the extensive plain of Wady Rahah. 
 
 (Photograph by the Ordnance Survey.) 
 
 SSS 
 
 SS = 
 > 
 ——= 
 
 The Mountains of Sinai, Ras Siufsafeh 
 
 — 
 —= 
 
 —S= 
 
 > 
 —S> 
 
 SS 
 
 =—S> 
 
 —S 
 
 in the centre. 
 
44 
 
 2 BOO DUDS EW IG A WI 
 
 identified with Rephidim, and immediately 
 in front the far wider plain Er Rahah; to the 
 left a plain of greater extent than was pre- 
 viously supposed, the Seil Leja. From every 
 part of these two Wadys the granite rock 
 of Ras Sufsafeh is distinctly visible, and there 
 is space for the entire host of the Israelites, 
 taking the highest calculation of their numbers. 
 This fact, of cardinal importance in the ques- 
 tion, is attested by the military officers who 
 conducted the survey. 
 
 Indeed Sir Henry James concurs with those 
 officers in the opinion that no spot in the 
 world can be pointed out which combines in 
 
 * amore remarkable manner the conditions of a 
 
 commanding height, and of a plain in every 
 part of which the sights and sounds described 
 in Exodus would reach an assembled multi- 
 tude of more than two million souls. The 
 description of Ras Sufsafeh, the central height in 
 the subjoined engraving, taken from the pho- 
 tographs, presents many remarkable coinci- 
 
 dences; and though inferior in height to the 
 
 peak of Jebel Musa, it satisfies the main con- 
 ditions of the narrative. 
 
 Dean Stanley, ‘S. P.’ p. 42—44, has drawn 
 out, with his usual felicity of expression, the 
 most striking characteristics of the scenery. 
 He observes that the existence of such a plain 
 in front of such a cliff is so remarkable a 
 coincidence with the sacred narrative, as to 
 furnish a strong internal argument, not only 
 of its identity with the scene, but of the scene 
 itself having been described by an eye-witness. 
 He then dilates upon other not less impressive 
 circumstances. The awful and lengthened 
 approach as to some natural sanctuary; the 
 plain not broken and narrowly shut in, like 
 almost all others in the range, but presenting a 
 long retiring sweep against which the people 
 could remove and stand afar off; the cliff 
 rising like a huge altar in front of the whole 
 congregation, and visible against the sky in 
 lonely grandeur from end to end of the whole 
 
 plain, the very image of the ‘‘mount that 
 might be touched,” and from which the 
 ‘¢ voice” of God might be heard far and wide 
 over the stillness of the plain below, widened 
 at that point to the utmost extent by the con- 
 fluence of all the contiguous valleys; the place 
 where beyond all other parts of the Peninsula 
 is the adytum withdrawn as if in the end of 
 the world from all the stir and confusion of 
 earthly things. We are also indebted to 
 Dean Stanley for noting other details which 
 are fully borne out by the late exploration, and 
 scarcely leave room for doubt as to the exact 
 point of the delivery of the Law. A small 
 eminence at the entrance of the convent valley 
 is marked by the name of Aaron, from which 
 he is believed to have witnessed the festival of 
 the golden calf; a tradition which fixes the 
 locality of the encamption on Wady Rahah. 
 Two other points meet here and nowhere 
 else; first Moses is described as descending the 
 mountain without seeing the people, the shout 
 strikes the ear of his companion before they 
 ascertain the cause; the view breaks on him 
 suddenly as he draws nigh to the camp, and 
 he throws down the tables and dashes them in 
 pieces ‘‘beneath the mount:” now any one de- 
 scending the mountain path by which Ras Suf= 
 safeh is accessible (according to Captain Wilson 
 in three-quarters of an hour to a practised 
 mountaineer) through the oblique gullies which 
 flank it, would hear the sounds borne through 
 the silence of the plain, but would not see the 
 plain itself until he emerged from the lateral 
 Wady; and when he did so he would be im- 
 mediately under the precipitous cliff of Sufsa- 
 feh. ‘The brook which came down from the 
 mount is probably identified with that which 
 flows through the Seil Leja. 
 
 Taking all these circumstances into con-. 
 sideration it seems impossible to resist the 
 conclusion that the Law was delivered on Ras 
 Leste to the Israelites encamped in the plain 
 
 elow. 
 
 i. Sak, 
 
ESSAY I. 
 
 ON THE BEARINGS OF EGYPTIAN HISTORY 
 UPON THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 1. SourcEs of Egyptian history. 2. General results. 3. List of Pharaohs from 12th to 20th Dynasty. 
 4. Time of Abram’s visit; objections and proofs; Story of the two Brothers; Benihassan; 
 Story of Saneha; presents to Abram. 5. Time of Joseph; invasion of Hyksos; inquiry into 
 
 Manetho’s statements; era of Set Nubte. 
 7. Connection of 12th Dynasty with On. 
 
 under the Hyksos. 
 
 6. Apepi or Apophis not the Pharaoh of Joseph. 
 8. Tomb of Chnumhotep; Egyptian nomes. 
 Egyptian irrigation ; labyrinth under Amenemha III. 
 11. Inquiry into date of Exodus. 
 a conqueror, builder of ports, &c., employs forced labourers. 
 14. Last year of Thotmes II.; probable date of the Exodus. 
 
 9. 
 10. Probable condition of the Israelites 
 12. Amosis or Aahmes I., a new king, 
 
 13. Chronology, dates examined. 
 15. AmenophisI. 16. Thotmes I. 
 
 17. Thotmes II.; events of reign ; character of Queen Hatasou. 18. Campaigns of Thotmes III. 
 
 concluded 40 years after decease of Thotmes II. 
 
 and Thotmes IV. 
 
 Judges. 
 campaign in Syria. 
 with Hebrew captives. 
 in Egyptian Papyrus. 
 
 Israelites. 
 Essay. 34. Rameses III. 
 
 (1.) OuR knowledge of early Egyptian history 
 is derived chiefly from monumental inscrip- 
 tions and papyri, which have been deciphered 
 within the last few years; partly also from 
 fragments of Manetho, and from the accounts 
 of Greeks who visited Egypt after the close 
 of the Old Testament history.’ 
 - The historical notices drawn from the last 
 source have little independent value. Facts of 
 importance, corroborated by modern _re- 
 searches, are recorded by Herodotus, Dio- 
 dorus, and other Greeks, but they are mixed 
 with legends, disfigured by manifest forgeries, 
 and their statements, so far as regards the 
 chronology, are irreconcileable with contem- 
 porary inscriptions. 
 The fragments of Manetho? have a higher 
 
 1 The principal object of this dissertation is to 
 bring the latest discoveries to bear upon biblical 
 questions, reference is therefore seldom made to 
 works of great value already well known to all 
 students. It is right to observe that it was 
 printed in 1868; a few references have been 
 made in the notes, and two or three in the text, 
 to works which have appeared before the last 
 revision in 1870. 
 
 2 The best account of Manetho is given by Rev. 
 H. Browne in Kitto’s ‘Cyclopzedia.” All the frag- 
 
 19. Objections considered. 20. Amenophis II. 
 
 21. Amenophis III. and the Queen Tei. 22. Religious revolution in Egypt. 
 23. Statements of Manetho, Cheremon, Lysimachus, and Diodorus. 
 Rameses II. with the Pharaoh of Moses considered. 
 26. Campaigns of Seti I. against the Cheta. 
 28. Fortresses built or enlarged. 
 30. Alliance of Rameses with Cheta. 
 32. State of Goshen at the same time incompatible with occupation by 
 33. Reign of Merneptah ; events and dates coincide with the first hypothesis in this 
 
 24. The identification of 
 25. State of Palestine under the early 
 27. Rameses II., length of reign, first 
 
 29. Employment of Aperu identified 
 31. State of Palestine described 
 
 value. He was a priest, conversant with the 
 literature of ancient Egypt, and had access to 
 monuments which, under the Ptolemies, were 
 for the most part in a state of perfect preser- 
 vation. The original history perished at a 
 very early period, and is only known from ex- 
 tracts in Josephus. The catalogue of Kings 
 begins with gods, and continues through 
 thirty dynasties of mortals, ending with Nec- 
 tanebo 343 B.c. The list is derived from 
 allthentic sources, but there are numerous 
 errors and mis-statements attributable in 
 part to the ignorance or carelessness of 
 transcribers. ‘This remark applies to names, 
 but still more to dates, which are seldom 
 confirmed, and often contradicted, by the 
 monuments.? 
 
 The facts drawn from old Egyptian docu- 
 
 ments are to be found in the first volume of 
 Bunsen’s ‘Egypt.’ The extracts in Josephus 
 are taken from the Alyumriaxd; the catalogue of 
 dynasties is preserved by Syncellus, 800 A.D., 
 in two widely-differing recensions, one from the 
 lost ‘Chronographia’ of Julius Africanus, 220 
 A.D., the other from the ‘Chronicon’ of Euse- 
 bius, of which we have now the Armenian 
 version.. 
 
 3 The regnal years of many kings are deter- 
 
444. 
 
 ments are of the highest importance. Some 
 refer to past transactions, and are chiefly 
 valuable as showing what view the Egyptians 
 cook of their ancient history, more especially 
 of the succession and character of their an- 
 cient kings. Other inscriptions relate to 
 contemporary events, which they describe for 
 the most part in highly coloured and inflated 
 language, but apparently without careless or 
 wilful misstatement of the facts. 
 
 (2.) From these monuments the history of a 
 large portion of the ancient and middle em- 
 pire, with which alone we are now concerned, 
 has been constructed, though not without 
 long intervals of partial or total obscurity. 
 The earliest part of that history has lately 
 been investigated with great care, and the 
 results given in a work by M. de Rougé,> to 
 which reference will frequently be made in 
 the following pages. ‘The names of nearly all 
 the Pharaohs of the first six dynasties have 
 been found, together with notices which 
 
 prove the extent and complete organisation of’ 
 
 their kingdom. 
 
 The interval between the sixth and the 
 eleventh dynasties is of uncertain duration. 
 No light is thrown upon it by contemporary 
 monuments. M. de Rougé ® considers it pro- 
 bable that “the royal families placed here in 
 the lists of Manetho do but represent sove- 
 reigns of a part of the country, contemporary 
 with other Pharaohs.” 
 
 The twelfth dynasty again stands out in 
 clear and strong relief. ‘The Pharaohs were 
 lords of all Egypt; their monuments repre- 
 sent the highest development of sculpture and 
 architecture, and the main events of their 
 reigns are recorded in numerous inscriptions. 
 Some facts of importance have also been lately 
 ascertained in reference to the early kings of 
 the thirteenth dynasty, proving that they too 
 were masters of all Egypt, and therefore that 
 the invasion of the Shepherd kings could not 
 
 mined from contemporary inscriptions. The dis- 
 crepancies in Manetho are so numerous that they 
 can scarcely be accounted for by errors of trans- 
 cription. 
 
 4 The two most important documents reé- 
 ferring to the past are the Turin Papyrus 
 (published by Lepsius, ‘ Auswahl,’ 1842, and 
 ‘Keenigsbuch,’ 1858), and the list of kings 
 lately discovered in the temple of Abydos by 
 M. Mariette. It is printed in the Ԥ Zeit- 
 schrift,’ 1864, by M. de Rougé, ‘ Recherches,’ 
 pl. ii., and by M. Mariette, ‘ Fouilles,’ vol. ii. 
 It represents Seti I., accompanied by his son 
 Rameses II., in the act of rendering homage to 
 seventy-six of his ancestors, beginning with Mena 
 or Menes. 
 
 5 ‘Recherches sur les Monuments qu’on peut 
 attribuer aux six premieres Dynasties de Mane- 
 thon.’ Paris, 1866. 
 
 6 ‘Recherches,’ p. iv, This statement, is 
 again made in M. de Rouge’s ‘Exposé de I’Etat 
 actuel des Etudes égyptiennes,’? 1867, See 
 p- 17- 
 
 ON THE BEARINGS OF EGYPTIAN HISTORY 
 
 have taken place at the time formerly assumed 
 by Lepsius.’ 
 
 The interval between the fourth king of 
 the thirteenth dynasty and the last of the 
 seventeenth is a period of confusion and dis- 
 turbance. The monuments supply no data by 
 which the order of events and the chronology 
 can be determined, or even probably conjec- 
 tured. That Egypt during that time was in- 
 vaded by the Hyksos, who were masters of 
 the north, has been proved by the researches 
 of M. Mariette: part of the country appears 
 to have been governed throughout the period 
 by contemporary dynasties, ending with Rase- 
 kenen; but the most complete list of the an- 
 cestors of Seti I. gives the name of no Pha- 
 raoh between Amenemha, the last king but 
 one. of the twelfth dynasty, and Aahmes, or 
 Amosis, the first. of the eighteenth. 
 
 From the beginning of the eighteenth dy- 
 nasty, when the Hyksos were expelled by 
 Aahmes: I., the monumental history of Egypt 
 is tolerably complete; the succession of nearly 
 all the Pharaohs and the principal events in 
 the reigns of the most distinguished are dis- 
 tinctly. recorded. ‘The chronology, however, 
 is uncertain; the regnal years are often found 
 on.the monuments, but without even an ap- 
 proximation to completeness ; with one excep- 
 tion, to be noticed presently, no general era, 
 or computation of lengthened periods, is based 
 on the authority of ancient inscriptions. 
 
 (3.) The subjoined list embraces the whole 
 period within which the Israelites and their 
 ancestors are assumed by any scholars to 
 have been in contact with Egypt before or 
 soon after the settlement in Canaan. 
 
 t2th Dynasty—Amenemha, Osirtasin LI., 
 Amenemha II., Osirtasin II., Osirtasin HL, 
 Amenemha III., Amenemha IV., and a Queen, 
 Ra-Sebek-Netrou. 
 
 13th Dynasty.—A series of Pharaohs bear- 
 ing a general name, Sebek-hotep. 
 
 14th to 17th Dynasty.—Hyksos, and Egyp- 
 tians; the last of the Hyksos, Apepi, or 
 Apophis ; the last of the contemporary Egyp- 
 tians, ‘Ta-aakern Rasekenen. 
 
 18th Dynasty. — Aahmes I. (Nefertari 
 Queen), Amenhotep I., Thotmes I. (Aahmes 
 Regent), Thotmes II., Thotmes III., Amen- 
 hotep II., Thotmes IV., Amenhotep IIL, 
 Amenhotep IV. (who took the name Khun- 
 Aten), three other kings not recognised as 
 legitimate, Horemheb. 
 
 19th Dynasty.—Rameses I., Seti IL, Ra- 
 meses II., Merneptah I , Seti IT. or Merneptah 
 II., Amemmeses, Siptah, and Tauser. 
 
 2oth Dynasty.—Rameses III., twelve kings 
 bearing the name Rameses with special desig- 
 nations. 
 
 (4.) The first contact with Egypt is generally 
 admitted,’ and may be here assumed to have 
 
 7 See M. de Rougé, ‘Recherches,’ pp. vi. vii. 
 8 Lepsius is the only exception. All other 
 scholars in England, France, and Germany, are 
 
UPON THE PENTATEUCH, 
 
 taken place before the eighteenth dynasty: 
 the first question to be considered is whether 
 the visit of Abram, and the immigration of 
 the Israelites, are to be referred to the period 
 of disturbance and general misery which fol- 
 lowed the invasion of the Hyksos, and lasted 
 till their expulsion, or to the earlier period 
 when Egypt was united and prosperous under 
 its native sovereigns, 
 
 The natural impression made by the narra- 
 tive in the Bcok of Genesis would certainly 
 be that the transactions which it sets before 
 us so fully and distinctly, belong to the earlier 
 period. The account of Abram’s visit (Gen. 
 xii. 10-20) is very brief, but it evidently 
 represents Egypt as in a condition of great 
 prosperity. It was the resort of foreigners 
 in times of famine. Pharaoh and his princes 
 are rich and luxurious, nor are there any 
 indications of war or intestine troubles. 
 
 It has, however, been argued that some 
 facts in this short narrative point rather to 
 the habits of a nomad and half-savage race, 
 than to the polished and civilised Pharaohs of 
 the ancient empire. It is urged that repre- 
 sentations of camels are not found on Egyp- 
 tian monuments; but they formed part of the 
 property which Abram acquired by the favour 
 of Pharaoh. It is, however, known that long 
 before that period the Pharaohs were masters 
 of a large part of the Peninsula of Sinai, and 
 of the intervening district, nor is it likely that 
 they would have kept up their communica- 
 tions without using the ‘ships of the desert.’ 
 Camels were not likely to be represented on 
 the sepulchral monuments at Benihassan,? far 
 from the frontiers of Egypt; they were nct 
 used in the interior of the country, and were 
 probably regarded as unclean. 
 
 Two objections of more importance rest on 
 the supposed habits and feelings of the early 
 
 so far agreed, they place the visit of Abraham 
 before the eighteenth dynasty. Dr. Ebers places 
 the visit of Abraham before the Hyksos, and 
 that of Joseph some time after their expulsion. 
 This involves, according to his calculations, 
 an interval of some eight or ten centuries 
 between Abraham and Joseph. ‘The argu- 
 ments by which he shows that neither could 
 have visited Egypt during the Hyksos period 
 corroborate the position taken in this disserta- 
 tion. Dr. Ebers’ work, ‘ Agypten und die 
 Biicher Moses,’ published a few months since, 
 reached me after this dissertation was ready for 
 the press. Reference will be made to it in the 
 notes. 
 
 9 We have no other monuments which repre- 
 sent the habits of Egypt under the twelfth 
 dynasty. There are no representations of camels 
 on monuments of the Ptolemaic or the Roman 
 period, when they were of course well known to 
 the Egyptians. Ebers supposes that it was con- 
 trary to the rules of Egyptian art to represent 
 these uncouth forms. This is possible, but 
 scarcely probable, since the giraffe and other 
 strange animals are common on the monuments. 
 It is more probable that they were held unclean, 
 
 ‘hiératiques de Berlin,’ p. xiv. 
 
 445 
 
 Egyptian kings: late discoveries have con- 
 verted these objections into strong argu- 
 ments in favour of the earlier date. 
 
 The fear which Abram felt lest his wife 
 should be taken from him, and that he should 
 be slain for her sake, would seem to indicate 
 wild and savage habits, such as can scarcely 
 be attributed to native Egyptians. But in the 
 story of the two brothers,” the Pharaoh of 
 the time, acting on the advice of his coun- 
 sellors, sends two armies to fetch a beautiful 
 woman by force and then to murder her hus- 
 band. The story is full of wild superstitions, 
 but the portraiture of manners is remarkably 
 simple and graphic, and it unquestionably 
 represents the feelings of the Egyptians at the 
 time of their highest civilisation. It belongs 
 to the age of Rameses II., and the act is at- 
 tributed not to a tyrant and oppressor, but to 
 a Pharaoh beloved by his people, and passing 
 into heaven at his decease. 
 
 Another curious coincidence has been 
 pointed out by M. Chabas, ‘Les Papyrus 
 In a very an- 
 cient papyrus of Berlin, referring to the rath 
 dynasty, the wife and children of a foreigner 
 
 are confiscated as a matter of course, and 
 
 become the property of the king. M. Chabas 
 observes, “ C’est ainsi qu’a une époque pro- 
 bablement un peu postérieure a celle des évine- 
 ments que raconte notre papyrus, Abraham 
 
 -se vit enlever sa femme Sarai, qui fut placce 
 
 dans la maison du Roi.” 
 
 It is again objected that Abram was not 
 likely to be admitted into the presence, much 
 less into the favour, of a native Egyptian king, 
 whereas a nomad of kindred origin and similar 
 habits might willingly receive him. 
 
 We have, however, two distinct and abso- 
 lute proofs that under the twelfth dynasty a 
 personage of the race, habits, and position of 
 Abram would be welcomed under such cir- 
 cumstances as those described in Genesis. 
 
 In the sepulchral monuments at Benihassan, 
 and in the tomb of the Governor of the pro- 
 vince, a man of the highest rank, nearly related 
 to the reigning Pharaoh, Osirtasin IL., is found 
 one of the most interesting and best known 
 pictures of the ancient empire. It represents 
 the arrival of a nomad chief, with his family 
 and dependents, to render homage and seek 
 the protection of the prince. ‘These foreigners 
 are called Amu," a name which was given 
 
 10 This curious story, the earliest fiction in, 
 existence, is among the select Papyri in the: 
 British Museum: it is called the Papyrus: 
 d’Orbiney: a fac-simile is published by the» 
 Trustees of the Museum: it contains nineteen 
 pages of hieratic writing, remarkably clear and 
 legible: the style is simple, and presents fewer 
 difficulties than any similar document. It has 
 been translated in part by Mr. Goodwin, Mr. 
 Le Page Renouf, and M. de Rougé. The story 
 abounds throughout with illustrations of the nar- 
 rative in the Pentateuch. 
 
 11 The word is applied to pastoral nomads, 
 
446 
 
 specially to the native tribes on the north-west 
 of Egypt and in Palestine of Semitic descent. 
 The chief is called the Hak, or prince, corre- 
 sponding to Sheich, as used chiefly of heads 
 of tribes: his name is Abshah.” The features 
 of the family, their colour, and their costume, 
 a rich.tunic, or “coat of many colours,” are 
 thoroughly Semitic. It is to be observed also 
 that, although they are represented as sup- 
 pliants, making lowly obeisance, and bringing 
 the customary gifts, yet the prince receives 
 them as persons of some distinction: a scribe 
 who presents them holds a tablet describing 
 their number and purpose, and a slave behind 
 the governor bears his sandals, which were 
 only taken off on ceremonial occasions. 
 
 Not less striking is the evidence drawn 
 from one of the oldest papyri in existence, 
 lately translated by Mr. Goodwin. He calls 
 it the Story of Saneha: the events which it 
 relates belong to the reigns of the first two 
 kings of the twelfth dynasty, Amenemha and 
 Osirtasin, Saneha (i.e. son of the Sycomore, 
 a name probably given or assumed on his 
 adoption by the Egyptians) was, like the chief 
 above described, an Amu; he was not only 
 received into the service of the Pharaoh, but 
 rose to high rank, and, even after a long resi- 
 dence as a fugitive in a foreign land, he was 
 restored to favour, made “a counsellor among 
 the officers, set among the chosen ones: pre- 
 cedence is accorded to him among the cour- 
 tiers, he is installed in the house of a prince, 
 and prepares his sepulchre among the tombs 
 of the chief officers.” Mr. Goodwin points 
 out the resemblance between this narrative and 
 the history of Abraham; but it proves some- 
 thing more, for it shows that to an Egyptian of 
 that early age the circumstances in the history 
 of Abraham and of Joseph which are often 
 regarded as improbable would appear most 
 natural, facts if not of frequent, yet of certain 
 occurrence. 
 
 M. Chabas, in a treatise on the same papy- 
 rus, observes—“ Ce narrateur devint le favori 
 de ce monarque (sc. Asirtasin) et fut pendant 
 quelque temps préposé a l’admin stration de 
 
 and specially those of Arabia and Palestine. 
 It is an Egyptian word, derived from Amu 
 
 (— R y) .) » a herdsman’s scourge. The 
 
 word Shasous, which will occur frequently, is 
 also applied to nomads, but probably with 
 reference to their wandering habits, equivalent 
 to Bedouins. Hyksos is not the name of a 
 people, but of the dynasty, and probably means 
 Prince of the Shasous. M. Chabas objects to 
 this etymology, but it is generally accepted, and 
 rests on strong grounds. 
 
 22 Some have thought that the name is iden- 
 tical with Abraham, an opinion which is un- 
 doubtedly incorrect; but there is a very remark- 
 able resemblance between the names, both in 
 form and meaning: since ‘‘shah” means sand, 
 and ‘‘raham”’ means multitude. When Abshah 
 _was received, Abraham would not be rejected. 
 
 ON THE: BEARINGS. OF EGYPTIAN, HISTORY 
 
 Egypte, pour en développer les ressources. Ce 
 détail nous rappelle le role que, selon!’Ecriture, 
 Pharaon attribua au patriarche Joseph.” 
 
 It may also be argued that such a reception 
 was far less likely to be accorded to either 
 of these Patriarchs at any later period. The 
 little that is positively known of the Hyksos, 
 the masters of Tanis, indicates a certain harsh- 
 ness and even ferocity of character ; nor after 
 their expulsion were the kings either of the 
 eighteenth or nineteenth dynasty likely to look 
 with favour upon foreigners bearing, as may 
 be probably inferred, a close resemblance to 
 them in features and language. ‘The presents 
 too which the Pharaoh made to Abram in- 
 clude sheep, oxen, asses, and slaves, all of 
 which are frequently represented on the early 
 monuments, and specially at Benihassan,*—a 
 fact the more important to be noticed since 
 V. Bohlen and others ventured to deny that 
 either sheep or asses were common in Egypt: 
 the ass was looked upon as unclean under the 
 middle and later Empire, as Typhonian, and 
 would not probably have been presented to a 
 favoured stranger. ‘The omission of horses is 
 remarkable. ‘The Hyksos, admitted to be 
 Arabians, probably brought the horse into 
 Egypt, and no animal was more prized by the 
 later Pharaohs ; but it was wholly unknown, 
 so far as we can judge from the monuments, 
 to the Egyptians of the twelfth or any earlier 
 dynasty.”® 
 
 In fact, the notices of Abram’s visit to Egypt 
 agree so entirely with all that is certainly 
 known of the Egyptians under the twelfth 
 dynasty, and differ in so many material points 
 from what is known from the monuments or 
 early tradition of the Hyksos, and of the 
 Middle Empire, that critics of very opposite 
 schools have concurred in adopting the earlier 
 date, notwithstanding the difficulty presented 
 by their acceptance of the chronology of 
 Manetho as given by Africanus or Josephus. 
 
 For my own part I regard it as all but cer- 
 
 13 This alludes particularly to the hard, sullen 
 features, wholly unlike those of Egyptian princes, 
 found on the lately-discovered monuments which 
 represent the Hyksos at Tanis. See ‘ Rey. 
 Archéologique,’ 1861, p. 105. Dr. Ebers gives 
 the head of the Sphinx from M. Mariette, 
 lnc, l2a3: 
 
 14 Sheep are represented on the Pyramids—in 
 one inscription 3208 as the property of an 
 individual. Asses of great size and beauty are 
 found in many pictures at Benihassan. I believe, 
 but may be mistaken, that they occur compara- 
 tively seldom on the monuments of later periods. 
 
 15 V. Bohlen infers from this omission that 
 Genesis could not have been written by an 
 author conversant with Egyptian manners. The 
 
 true inference is that he describes exactly what 
 
 took place at the time which he gives an account 
 of. It is very probable that horses were first 
 
 ‘introduced under the 12th dynasty, after the 
 
 reign of Osirtasin. Krom that time the inter- 
 course with Asia appears to have been constant, 
 
UPON THE PENTATEUCH. : 
 
 tain that Abraham visited Egypt in some reign 
 between the middle of the eleventh and the 
 thirteenth dynasty, and most probably under 
 one of the earliest Pharaohs of the twelfth. 
 (s5.) The history of Joseph belongs to a period 
 -about two centuries later.6 The duration of 
 the twelfth dynasty is estimated at 213 years; 
 and as the monuments were numerous and 
 complete in Manetho’s time, it is probable 
 that the regnal years are drawn from them, 
 and that the numbers are tolerably correct. 
 It has been lately proved beyond all doubt 
 that the invasion of the Hyksos could not 
 have taken place immediately afterwards, as 
 was formerly supposed. Colossal figures of 
 great beauty, and inscriptions, have been found 
 at Tanis, the head-quarters of the Hyksos, 
 which prove that the fourth king of the thir- 
 teenth dynasty was still in undisturbed posses- 
 sion of that city; and monumental notices of 
 even later kings are found, both at Tanis and 
 -in other parts of Egypt, scarcely reconcileable 
 with the presence of the Arabian invaders.'7 
 
 So far as the monuments and other Egyp- 
 tian documents are concerned, we are at 
 liberty to place the visit of Joseph either to- 
 wards the end of the twelfth dynasty, the ear- 
 lier portion of the thirteenth, or under the 
 first Hyksos. 
 
 We are bound to give special attention to 
 this last alternative ; it was maintained by ail 
 ancient writers, and is accepted, with few but 
 important exceptions, by modern critics. 
 Thus Syncellus: “ It is asserted unanimously 
 by all that Joseph ruled over Egypt in the 
 time of Apophis :’ Eusebius, speaking of the 
 seventeenth (Shepherd) dynasty, says xara 
 _rovtous Aiyunriov Bacieds "loond Seixvutat. 
 This unanimous consent, however, refers 
 only to Josephus and to those who drew 
 their information exclusively from his account 
 of Manetho’s work. It depended wholly 
 upon chronological calculations, and it is of 
 course quite clear that, if the Shepherd dynasty 
 had lasted some 800 years, all the narrative in 
 Genesis would have fallen within it. 
 
 This necessitates a brief inquiry into the 
 grounds for the statements in Manetho. 
 
 We have first an account of a dynasty of 
 six Shepherd kings: their names in Josephus 
 are Salatis, Beon, Apachnas, Apophis, Jannes, 
 Assir. The general accuracy of this list 
 may be admitted, transposing one name only, 
 -viz., Apophis, who is known to have been 
 the last of the Shepherd kings. The late 
 ‘discoveries of M. Mariette’ at Tanis have 
 given us contemporary authority for the 
 first name. It is Semitic, old Arabian pro- 
 
 bably (Sddaris = OY mighty, ruler), but the 
 
 16 The dates are not certain, but Isaac was 
 ‘born some years after Abraham’s visit to Egypt, 
 lived 180 years (Gen. xxxv. 28), and died before 
 Joseph was sold by his brethren. 
 
 " W See M. de Rougé, ‘ Recherches,’ p. vii. We 
 owe these important facts to M. Mariette. 
 
 447 
 
 Egyptians transcribe it accurately and give 
 the full title, with the invariable adjuncts 
 of Egyptian etiquette, “the Good Deity, star 
 of both worlds, Son of the Sun, Set Shalti,!® 
 beloved by Sutech, Lord of Avaris.” So that 
 Salatis, the first of the Shepherd dynasty, 
 assumed at once the state and title of the 
 Pharaohs, and at least claimed to be sovereign 
 of all Egypt. ‘The second name Beon or 
 ‘“‘Benon,”’ the more correct reading of Afri- 
 canus, is also found.!? Like many other words 
 it has probably the same meaning” in Semitic 
 and Egyptian, Son of the Eye, ze. the beloved 
 one. ‘The order of the three last names is 
 proved by the Turin Papyrus, and by the well- 
 ascertained position of Apophis. 
 
 Up to this point we havea solid foundation ; 
 six kings, foreigners, two bearing Semitic 
 names, and recognised by ancient Egyptian 
 documents. The duration of the dynasty 
 may have been between two and three cen- 
 turies. 
 
 But in addition to these kings, Manetho, 
 according to Josephus, states that a dynasty 
 or dynasties of Shepherds ruled over all Egypt 
 upwards of 500 years. Africanus gives two 
 dynasties, one lasting 284 years, the other 
 518. For this statement, however, no evidence 
 is adduced. Not a single name is given by 
 Josephus. The Turin Papyrus. has no indi- 
 cation of the dynasty. ‘The monuments are 
 absolutely silent. ‘The statement, indeed, is 
 in glaring contradiction to the fact that Salatis 
 was the first and Apophis the last of the 
 Shepherd kings. It involves an admission of 
 the most improbable of all assumptions, for 
 which not a shadow of resemblance can be 
 found in ancient or modern history,—an as- 
 sumption that, after a total suspension of the 
 national life lasting from five to ten centuries, 
 after a complete overthrow of their govern- 
 ment, institutions, and religion, the Egyptians 
 reverted to the exact point of civilisation in 
 which the invaders found them, speaking and 
 writing their own language without a trace ot 
 foreign infusion,” worshipping the old gods 
 with the old rites, retaining their old theology, 
 
 18 The group is noticeable pe edd 
 
 It is found also in a mutilated form in the 
 
 ‘Turin Papyrus. 
 
 19 In the Papyrus Sallier 1, pl. 1, 1. 7. 
 
 70 YY j2. The Egyptian is Beben-an, which 
 Dr. Ebers derives from Ben, ‘‘ son,” and ‘‘az,” 
 the eye. The Egyptians have the well-known 
 Hebrew and classical term, ‘‘ child of the eye” 
 for ‘‘ darling.” 
 
 21 The strong infusion of Semitic belongs to 
 the age of Rameses II. The inscriptions of the 
 
 eighteenth dynasty are nearly free from it. A 
 
 very remarkable confirmation of the above state- 
 ments is found in the account of the mummy of 
 Aah-hotep, mother of Ahmes I., given by M. Ma- 
 riette, ‘ Musée de Boulaq,’ p. 254:—‘‘ L’Egypte 
 est revenue sous la xvii™e dynastie avec la plus 
 singuliére persistance au style de la xime,” 
 
448 
 
 and recognising in the descendants of their 
 old Pharaohs the inheritors of all their titles 
 and prerogatives. It seems quite incredible 
 that such a statement should have been adopted, 
 as adopted it has been by critics remarkable 
 for sagacity, and some for caution approaching 
 to scepticism. It is the only ground for the 
 assumption that Joseph must needs have 
 visited Egypt while it was under the dominion 
 of the Hyksos. 
 
 We do not attach much importance to 
 the chronology of this remote period, so far 
 as it rests on Egyptian documents: it is to a 
 great extent conjectural, and incapable of proof 
 or disproof. But it is a remarkable fact that 
 the only inscription on Egyptian monuments 
 of any age which mentions an era distinct 
 from the ‘regnal year of the actual sovereign, 
 is found on a monument referring to the 
 Hyksos. ‘The importance of this inscripticn 
 was pointed out by M. de Rougé,” and it has 
 been carefully examined by M. Chabas. The 
 personage who set up the tablet was an 
 official of high rank, Governor of ‘Tanis under 
 Rameses II. The date which he gives is the 
 four hundredth year from the era of Set Nubte, 
 i.e. Set the golden, under the reign of a 
 Hyksos king, Set-aa-Pehti, i.e. Set the mighty 
 and victorious. There is of course a wide 
 field for conjecture here. The reign of 
 Rameses was a very long one (see further 
 on, p. 464), and the Hyksos king is not posi- 
 tively identified. We may consider it as 
 almost certain that the Egyptian governor, 
 a descendant of the Hyksos, believed that 
 400 years had elapsed between the. era of 
 Set and some year in the reign of Rameses. 
 When, again, we consider the analogy of all 
 ancient eras, and the natural course of events, 
 we are all but forced to infer that this era 
 must coincide with the formal recognition of 
 Set as the chief object of worship to the 
 dynasty. If the Papyrus Sallier were our 
 only authority, that recognition might be as- 
 signed to Apophis; but the late discovery of 
 the style and title of the first of the Shepherd 
 Kings, Salatis the beloved of Set,” proves 
 that the establishment of Set worship at 
 Tanis was far more ancient, contemporary in 
 fact with the inauguration of the Shepherd 
 dynasty. 
 
 The inferences from these facts tally very 
 remarkably with the chronology which upon 
 the whole appears to be best supported by 
 
 2 Revue Archéologique,’ Feb. 1864. M. 
 Mariette sent a copy to the same Review, March, 
 1865. M. Chabas has two articles on it printed 
 in the ‘ Zeitschrift,’ April and May, 1865. The 
 tablet was found in a mass of ruins in the 
 sanctuary of the great temple at San, ze, 
 Tanis. 
 
 *3 It is probable that Set-aa-pehti, z¢ Set 
 the mighty and victorious, was either the 
 Egyptian translation of the Semitic Set-Shalt, 
 Set the mighty ruler, or a second title borne in 
 accordance with Egyptian usage, 
 
 successful campaign against Apophis.” 
 
 ON THE BEARINGS OF EGYPTIAN HISTORY 
 
 Biblical and documental evidence. ‘The end 
 of the reign of Rameses is most probably 
 about 1340 B.c. From this, 400 years would 
 bring us to the middle of the eighteenth 
 century, about 1750 B.c. The expulsion of 
 the Hyksos being taken about 1500, we have 
 thus 250 years for their dynasty, and 250 
 more would bring us to the time of Abraham. 
 Such arguments are of course open to objec- 
 tions, nor are they given here as conclusive, 
 but they have weight when they harmonize 
 with a system resting on wholly independent 
 grounds, One point at least is clear: if the 
 date is accepted it involves a considerable re- 
 duction in the length of the period assigned 
 by Lepsius and Brugsch to the dynastics 
 preceding the age of Rameses. 
 
 (6.) But the name of Apophis is specially 
 mentioned as that of the king by whom Joseph 
 was received. The question whether this is 
 possible or probable may now be decided by 
 the positive evidence of contemporary inscrip- 
 tions, and of the ancient papyrus, Sallier 1. 
 
 We know now that Apophis was the con- 
 temporary of Rasekenen, the immediate pre- 
 decessor of Aahmes I., and that Aahmes cap- 
 tured Avaris, the capital or chief fortress of 
 Apophis, and afterwards drove out all the 
 adherents of the hostile dynasty, pursuing 
 them as far as Palestine. 
 
 This fact is conclusive. Joseph was a very 
 young man when he came first under the 
 notice of Pharaoh, and lived to an advanced 
 age, I1o years, the utmost limit, as has been 
 lately shown,” of Egyptian life. He would 
 therefore have long outlived Apophis, but no 
 one supposes that he could have lived a pros- 
 perous and powerful man after the extermina- 
 tion of the dynasty by which he was raised to 
 the highest rank in the state. Nor do other 
 notices of the Pharaoh of Joseph at all accord 
 with what is known of Apophis. 
 
 Apophis was not, properly speaking, Lord 
 of all Egypt. Upper Egypt was governed by 
 an independent dynasty; and the very terms 
 which describe the extent of his influence 
 prove the limits of his dominion. Rasekenen, 
 his antagonist, retained possession of the The- 
 baid to the end of his life, and buildings of 
 great extent were erected by him in Mem- 
 phis and Thebes after the termination of a 
 The 
 
 *4 The inscriptions are found in the sepulchres 
 of officers who served under Ra-sekenen and the 
 first Pharaohs of the eighteenth dynasty. ‘They 
 are given by Lepsius, ‘Denkmiler,’ and have 
 been explained by M. de Rougé (whose treatise 
 on the tomb of Aahmes marked a crisis in the 
 advance of Egyptian studies), and are , quoted 
 repeatedly in M. Brugsch’s ‘ Histoire d’ Egypte.’ 
 
 25 By Mr. Goodwin, in the second part of the 
 
 ‘ Méelanges égyptologiques’ of M. Chabas. The 
 argument is good for Egypt, not for the patri- 
 archs, living the simple life and breathing the 
 pure air of the desert. 
 
 26 See Brugsch, ‘Die Geographie des alter 
 
 a 
 q 
 4 
 
UPON THES PEN TATEUCH; 
 
 Pharaoh of Joseph was certainly in a different 
 position. 
 
 We have also evidence touching the general 
 condition of Egypt under the dynasty of 
 which Apophis was the most powerful king, 
 and to whose reign the notice specially applies. 
 ‘The account given by Manetho of their devas- 
 tations is probably exaggerated. It is certain 
 that they did not deface the monuments to 
 the extent which is generaJly supposed. ‘The 
 pyramids, the obelisk at Heliopolis, colossal 
 figures and inscriptions even at Tanis (see 
 above), and monuments in Middle and Upper 
 Egypt, still bear witness in their favour. ‘The 
 Labyrinth in the Fayoum, and the great 
 temples at Memphis and Heliopolis, were cer- 
 tainly left by them uninjured. Still the im- 
 pression made by their ravages upon the 
 Egyptians was profound: the name by which 
 they were designated means pestilential deadly 
 enemies.” From an inscription at Karnak,* 
 we find that, under the nineteenth dynasty, 
 when the Egyptians would describe a period 
 of dreadful calamity, they could find no pre- 
 cedent so strong and apt as that of the Shep- 
 herd Kings. ‘“ One had not seen.anything like 
 it even in the time of the kings of Lower 
 Egypt, when the land of Egypt was in their 
 power, when wretchedness prevailed, in the 
 time when the kings of Upper Egypt had not 
 power to repel them.” ‘The account in the 
 Papyrus Sallier I. quite agrees with this, show- 
 ing that the reign of Apophis was cruel and 
 oppressive throughout, and occupied towards 
 the end, as we have seen, by .an internecine 
 war. 
 
 Again, no fact about Apophis is more cer- 
 tain than that he repudiated the national reli- 
 gion.” .'The testimony of the Papyrus Sallier 
 is clear and explicit : “the King Apepi adopted 
 
 fEgyptens,’ p. 180., M. Chabas in a treatise, 
 ‘Les Pasteurs en Egypte,’ published within the 
 last two months, assumes that three Pharaohs 
 bore the name Ra-sekenen, Ra the conqueror. 
 If this were granted, it would leave all other 
 arguments untouched. 
 
 *7 See M. Chabas, ‘ Mél. égypt.,’ i. 
 
 *8 See ‘Revue Archéologique’ for July and 
 August, 1867. M. de Rouge gives a full account 
 of the inscription, which has been lately pub- 
 lished by M. Duemichen, ‘Historische In- 
 schriften.’ I observe that the reference to the 
 Shepherd kings is adopted by Dr. Ebers, 
 ‘ ZEgypten,’ &c., p. 207. 
 
 29 The name Apepi, the Egyptian form of the 
 word, signifies the great serpent, the enemy of 
 Ra and Osiris. It was probably given to this 
 king, or assumed by him, to mark his antagonism 
 to ‘the old national religion. It has, however, 
 been shown by M. de Rougé, ‘ Recherches,’ 
 p- 9 and p. 45, that the worship of Sutech, or 
 Set, as the tutelary god of lower Egypt, dates 
 from the ancient empire. The peculiarity of 
 Apepi, and probably of his predecessors, would 
 seem to be his exclusive devotion to this deity, 
 who represented force and destruction. 
 
 449 
 
 Sutech as his God, he did not serve any God 
 which was in the whole land.” Sutech, or Set, 
 in later ages the representative of the evil 
 principle Typhon, is identified, and was cer- 
 tainly confounded with Baal of the Phe- 
 nicians. ‘The only monument * on which the 
 name of Apophis is found calls him “the be- 
 loved of Sutech:” an appellation, as we have 
 seen, borne by the first Shepherd king, and 
 probably common to all the dynasty. If we 
 accept the probable tradition of Porphyry 
 (‘de Abst.’ 11,55), that Aahmes I. suppressed 
 human sacrifices offered under the Shepherd 
 kings at Heliopolis, the form of worship must 
 have been ‘Typhonian, and in all probability of 
 Pheenician origin.*! 
 
 Each and all of these points are quite irre- 
 concileable with the account in Genesis. The 
 Pharaoh of Joseph was unquestionably Lord 
 of all Egypt: the country was in a state of 
 great prosperity: the religion, all the usages 
 and institutions of the Pharaoh and his cour- 
 tiers, were those of ancient Egypt. There 
 is not a single fact* in the history of Joseph 
 which is not illustrated by the inscriptions 
 and sculptures of the best and most pros- 
 perous periods of Egypt; not one which gives 
 the least indication of the predominance of a 
 foreign religion, habits, or race. 
 
 The question, however, still remains, if 
 Joseph did not enter Egypt when the Shep- 
 herds were there, did his visit and the immi- 
 gration of the Israelites take place before or 
 after that period? ‘We may assume that it 
 did not occur at a later time. With very few 
 exceptions, critics agree that the Israelites 
 were in Egypt at the .accession of the eigh- 
 teenth dynasty. If before, we have still to 
 inquire at what time. 
 
 This part of the inquiry is beset with con- 
 siderable difficulties. We have no means of 
 ascertaining the duration of the interval be- 
 tween the last sovereign of the twelfth dynasty 
 and the invasion of the Shepherds. The titles 
 of forty-eight kings of the thirteenth dynasty 
 are given in the papyrus of Turin; and the 
 names of three of them bear a very remark- 
 
 30 The inscription is given by Burton, ‘Ex- 
 cerpta Hieroglyphica,’ at San (z.e. Tanis), No. 7, 
 pl. xv. ; and-by Brugsch, ‘Geog. Inschr.,’ p. 88, 
 No. 576. Like Salatis, Apepi takes the style of 
 a legitimate Pharaoh. 
 
 31 Sutech is identified with Baal in numerous 
 inscriptions, and is represented specially as the 
 chief deity of the Cheta, masters of northern 
 Syria under the nineteenth dynasty. 
 
 32 This statement is strongly corroborated by 
 the work of Dr. Ebers. 
 
 33 It must be remembered that in Joseph’s 
 time the Egyptians would not eat with shep- 
 herds; they were an abomination to them. This, 
 of itself, is almost, if not quite, conclusive against 
 the supposition that he was at the court of a 
 Shepherd king. M. Chabas has shown this to 
 be a true and monumental designation of the 
 invaders, 
 
 gay 
 
450 
 
 able resemblance to the name given by 
 Pharaoh to Joseph. ‘There appear to be 
 good grounds for the opinion that they were 
 driven out of Lower Egypt, and retained a 
 partial and precarious hold on Middle or 
 Upper Egypt within a century or two after 
 their accession ; and if so, Joseph, at the latest, 
 may have lived under one of the early kings, 
 such as the Sebekhotep, whose colossal statue 
 in the Louvre belongs to the best age of 
 Egyptian art, and evidently also to a period of 
 unbroken prosperity. 
 
 It is however scarcely possible to resist 
 the impression made by monuments of the 
 twelfth dynasty, which seem to connect the 
 history of Abraham, as we have already seen 
 (p. 446), and still more specially that of Joseph, 
 with this most important and interesting period 
 of Egypt. 
 
 (7.) We have the fact that the princes 
 of this great dynasty stood in very special 
 relation to On or Heliopolis. The tem- 
 ple there was built by Osirtasin I., whose 
 name and official title, Osirtasin Cheperkara, 
 stand out in clear and perfect characters 
 on the oldest and most beautiful obelisk of 
 Egypt, still standing at On, the only but 
 certain evidence of the magnificence of the 
 temple. The priest of that city and temple, 
 judging from the general usage of the ancient 
 Pharaohs,” was in all probability a near rela- 
 tive of the sovereign. We have abundant 
 notices on the monuments of that dynasty 
 which agree with the intimations of Gene- 
 sis; proving, on the one hand, that the forms 
 of worship were purely Egyptian, and, on the 
 other hand, that the fundamental principles 
 which underlie those forms, and which be- 
 long, as we may not doubt, to the primeval 
 religion of humanity, were still distinctly 
 recognised, although they were blended with 
 speculation and superstitious errors: they 
 
 34 Viz. Zaf., z.c. food. See note on the name 
 Zafnath Paaneah. 
 
 35 See M. de Rougé, ‘Recherches,’ p. 34. 
 Nearly all the chief priests bear the titles 
 Suten sa or Suten rech—son, grandson, or 
 relative of the king. Ewald justly observes that 
 Heliopolis was, so to speak, the true sacerdotal 
 city and university of Northern Egypt. Ge- 
 schichte, ii., p. 51. 
 
 36 See especially Lepsius, ‘Alteste Texte des 
 Todtenbuchs.’ The earliest known text of 
 the seventeenth chapter of the Ritual be- 
 longs to the eleventh dynasty. Its import- 
 ance is recognised as the most ancient 
 statement of Egyptian views as to the origin 
 and government of the universe. It undoubt- 
 edly indicates the previous existence of a pure 
 Monotheism, of which it retains the great 
 principles, the unity, eternity, self-existence of 
 the unknown Deity. Each age witnessed some 
 corruption and amplification of the ancient 
 religion, and corresponding interpolations of the 
 old texts. The very earliest has several glosses, 
 and the text taken apart from them approaches 
 
 ON THE BEARINGS OF EGYPTIAN HISTORY 
 
 were moreover associated with a system 
 which, on many essential points, inculcated 
 a sound and even delicate morality. In the 
 priest of On a Shepherd king would have seen 
 the antagonist of his own special superstition, 
 the last man in Egypt whom he would have 
 brought into connection with his favourite 
 and prime minister: to an Osirtasin and to 
 Joseph himself the alliance would present 
 every inducement of policy, interest, and suit- 
 ableness. 
 
 (8.) The tombs at Benihassan have already 
 supplied us with illustrations of the history of 
 Abraham, which are equally applicable to that 
 of Joseph. ‘The inscriptions, which describe 
 the character of Chnumhotep (a near relative 
 and favourite of Osirtasin I. and his immediate 
 successor), and the recorded events of his 
 government, remind the reader irresistibly of 
 the young Hebrew. It is said of him®™ “he 
 injured no little child : he oppressed no widow: 
 he detained for his own purpose no fisher- 
 man: took from his work no shepherd: no 
 overseer’s men were taken. ‘There was no 
 beggar in his days: no one starved in his time. 
 ‘When years of famine occurred he ploughed 
 all the lands of the district producing abun- 
 dant food : no one was starved in it: he treated 
 the widow as a woman with a husband to 
 protect her.” ‘The mention of famine, and of 
 unusual precautions to guard against its re- 
 currence, together with other obvious traits of 
 resemblance, led some critics a few years since 
 to see in Chnumhotep the Egyptian original 
 of Joseph. At present the antecedents and 
 connections of that personage are too well 
 known to admit of any confusion; but the 
 probability must be admitted that a king, be- 
 longing to a dynasty which sought and re- 
 warded such characteristics in the great offi- 
 cers of state, should have advanced Joseph to 
 a position such as the Bible describes, such 
 too as the old Egyptian papyrus already quoted 
 (p. 446) shows to have been then within the 
 reach of a foreigner. 
 
 (9.) There are still more specific reasons for 
 fixing on this period. According to Genesis, 
 one permanent consequence of the visitation 
 was a new division of all Egypt, a redistri- 
 bution of the land and property: probably, as 
 is pointed out by the Bishop of Ely,® a neces- 
 sary and politic measure, after the complete 
 break-down of the ancient system. Now we 
 are told by Herodotus and Diodorus that an 
 ancient Egyptian king so divided the lands, 
 and that the same system continued to their 
 time. This king must evidently have be- 
 longed to a native dynasty: had the division 
 been made by a foreigner and invader, it 
 
 very nearly to the truth as revealed in the 
 Bible. 
 
 37 Lepsius, ‘Denkmiler,’ ii. pl. 122. Dr. 
 Birch, who gives an interlinear translation in 
 Bunsen’s ‘ Egypt,’ vol. v. p. 726-729. 
 
 88 See notes on Genesis. 
 
UPONE THE PENTATEUCH, 
 
 would have been swept away when the line of 
 the so-called legitimate Pharaohs was restored. 
 Those two historians indeed attribute the 
 division to the sovereign called Sesostris by 
 Herodotus, and Sesoosis by Diodorus: an 
 appellation which was afterwards appropriated 
 to Rameses II., or perhaps to his father, Seti I. 
 But it is well known that the exploits of the 
 great sovereigns who preceded Rameses II. 
 were transferred to him by popular tradition :® 
 it is certain also that the division into nomes, 
 and the exemption of the priestly lands from 
 taxation, were anterior to him by many cen- 
 turies. ‘The system appears to have been coeval 
 with the monarchy, certainly with the pyra- 
 mids, but in all probability was modified, and 
 extended, if not completed, under the great 
 Pharaohs of the twelfth dynasty. No occa- 
 sion can be pointed out more likely to have 
 suggested it, and to have enabled the Pha- 
 raoh to accomplish it, than that described in 
 Genesis. 
 
 Again, we learn from Egyptian sources that, 
 under Amenemha III., in some _ respects 
 the greatest king of this noble dynasty, 
 whose reign is separated from the first by an 
 interval of some two centuries (see above), a 
 work of extraordinary magnitude and import- 
 ance was undertaken and completed: one that 
 proves at once the terror caused by the pre- 
 vious liability to famines, and the enormous 
 resources, skill, and forethought of the Pha- 
 raoh. Amenemha III. first established a 
 complete system of dykes, canals, locks, and 
 reservoirs, by which the inundations of the 
 Nile were henceforth regulated.*? The im- 
 mense artificial lake of Mceris in the Fayoum 
 was made by his orders; it communicated 
 with the Nile by a canal, received the over- 
 flowing waters at the time of the inundation, 
 and secured the complete irrigation of the 
 adjoining nomes in the dry season. M. Li- 
 nant de Bellefonds,* to whose industry and 
 
 39 Josephus expressly states that Manetho 
 gives the name of Sesostris to the third king of 
 the twelfth dynasty, whom he represents as con- 
 queror of Asia. The researches of M. Mariette 
 have lately shown that Rameses II. was in the 
 habit of appropriating the exploits of his prede- 
 cessors, and substituting his own name on the 
 monuments (see below, p. 465). This evil habit 
 was adopted by hisson Merneptah, 
 
 40 See Brugsch, ‘ Histoire d’Egypte,’ p. 69. 
 Lepsius found a Nilometer of Amenemha and 
 several accurate notices of the height of the 
 inundations under the twelfth and thirteenth 
 dynasties at Semneh and Kumme. 
 
 41 ‘Mémoire sur le Lac Meceris : 
 1843. Meceris is not the name of a king, but 
 the Egyptian word ‘‘ mer,” a lake or reservoir. 
 Fayoum is the Arabic corruption of the Coptic 
 cbIORR, an old Egyptian word, ‘‘the sea.” 
 According to Ptolemy, near the lake was a 
 place called Bakkhis or Banchis. M. Brugsch 
 identifies this with a place called Pi-aneh, ‘‘ the 
 house of life,” which is found on the monuments 
 
 ’ Alexandrie, 
 
 451 
 
 ability we are indebted for ascertaining the 
 exact site and extent of this lake, observes 
 that the restoration of this magnificent work 
 would be one of the greatest benefits that 
 could be conferred on modern Egypt. Under 
 Amenemha III. also the great labyrinth, the 
 most stupendous work of that great age, was 
 erected. This building was probably con- 
 nected with the same series of events: it 
 consisted of a vast number of halls and build- 
 ings, in which the representatives of the Egyp- 
 tian nomes were assembled periodically to 
 consult on subjects of national interest; and 
 certainly not without a special view to the 
 conservation of a system which afforded the 
 best—indeed the only real—security against 
 the recurrence of the most formidable calamity 
 to which this people could be exposed. At 
 no period would an Egyptian king have such 
 special reasons for undertaking these works: 
 at none would he have such peculiar oppor- 
 tunities of carrying them into effect —the 
 reasons enforced by the seven years of famine, 
 and the means supplied by the reconstruction 
 of the territorial organisation, which placed 
 the whole resources of the nation at the dis- 
 posal of this Pharaoh.” 
 
 In the absence of positive evidence for or 
 against any hypotheses, these coincidences 
 may justify us in regarding it at least as a 
 very probable conjecture that the visit of 
 Abraham may have taken place under the first 
 king of the dynasty, and that of Joseph under 
 Amenemha III., the Pharaoh who is repre- 
 sented on the lately-discovered table of Aby- 
 dos as the last great king of all Egypt in the 
 ancient empire, and, as such, receiving divine 
 honours from his descendant Rameses. 
 
 (10.) But if Joseph and the Israelites were 
 received and treated with great favour by the 
 native dynasty, it may seem improbable that 
 they should have remained undisturbed under 
 the Shepherd kings. We have of course no 
 conclusive evidence either for or against the 
 objection; but we have facts enough to show 
 that it is quite possible that they may have 
 occupied a relative position under the fo- 
 reigners not differing widely from that in 
 which the invasion found them. ‘There can 
 be no doubt that the invaders directed their 
 assaults at once’ against the great cities of 
 Egypt; both to enrich themselves with the 
 spoil, and to secure their dominion over the 
 lands. We may also feel pretty confident 
 that they overthrew the national forms of 
 worship, although, as we have above shown, 
 
 in connexion with Sebek, the tutelary deity of 
 the district. See ‘Geographie des Alten 
 AEgyptens,’ p. 233. This name has a special 
 interest for its bearing upon Joseph’s Egyptian 
 name Zafnath Paaneah, ‘the food of life.” 
 
 42 The-copper mines at Wady Mughara were 
 worked under this prince; there is a curious 
 notice of the expedition in Brugsch, ‘H. E.,’ 
 p. 69. See also ‘Introduction’ to Exodus, 
 
 rb 2 
 
452 
 
 there is no evidence that they destroyed or 
 defaced the temples. ‘The Israelites, then a 
 small colony lately established, would offer no 
 temptation to their cupidity; no buildings, 
 no temples, no elaborate ritual which could 
 provoke their animosity. It must also be 
 borne in mind that all historians are agreed 
 that the invasion of the Hyksos was most 
 probably preceded by peaceful visits of the 
 chieftains of Arabia and the adjoining districts 
 of Palestine, of which we have numerous 
 traces in early monuments; from them they 
 may have learned at once to appreciate the 
 riches of Egypt, and to ascertain the state of 
 the country, The jealousy with which such 
 visitors were watched is distinctly noted in 
 Genesis: every nomad company might be 
 suspected of a desire to see the nakedness— 
 that is, to spy the assailable approaches to the 
 land; a jealousy of which also we have dis- 
 tinct notices in the story of Saneha and the 
 inscriptions of Benihassan. But when the 
 fathers of those invaders visited Egypt in 
 the time of the great famine, which, as we 
 know from other documents,* would draw 
 them, with their flocks and herds, to the 
 frontier, the person with whom they were 
 brought into contact, and for whom they 
 would feel the deepest reverence, was the 
 master of the granaries, the distributor of 
 food. Joseph could not be unknown by name 
 or by character to the early Hyksos, who 
 were little likely to disturb the kindred and 
 descendants of the man to whom they were 
 indebted for their lives. It is also evident 
 that the rapid multiplication of the Israelites 
 might be favoured by the withdrawal of the 
 native princes from their immediate neigh- 
 bourhood: they would be relieved from a 
 superintendence ever vigilant and suspicious. 
 It is not, however, necessary to assume any 
 special favour shown to the Israelites by the 
 Shepherds; the absence of any motive for 
 cruel and oppressive treatment is obvious, and 
 suffices for the removal of all objection on this 
 score to the historical combination we have 
 proposed. 
 
 (11.) We are nowin a position to consider 
 the question at what period in Egyptian history 
 the Exodus took place. Some points of im- 
 portance may be assumed as all but certain, 
 there being no difference of opinion between 
 Egyptologers. (1.) At whatever period the 
 Israelites came into Egypt, they were settled 
 in the district assigned to them when the first 
 sovereign of the eighteenth dynasty conquered 
 and expelled the Shepherd dynasty. (2.) The 
 Exodus is admitted to have taken place under 
 the eighteenth or nineteenth dynasty, under 
 which is a question to be settled, but certainly 
 under the one or the other. (3.) The dates re- 
 ferring to this period are still generally uncer- 
 tain, they rest on doubtful calculations ; it may 
 
 43 See the account of the admission of 
 Edomites under Merneptah, infra, p. 486. 
 
 ON THE BEARINGS OF EGYPTIAN THIStGr 
 
 suffice to quote the words of M. de Rougé, 
 adopted by M. Chabas, ‘ Mélanges égypto- 
 logiques,’ il. p. 112: “*On restera dans la 
 limite du probable en plagant Seti I. vers 1500, 
 et le commencement de la 17° dynastie vers 
 le 18° siccle. Mais il n’y aurait nullement 
 a sétonner si l’on s’était trompé de deux cents 
 ans dans cette estimation, tant les documents 
 sont viciés dans histoire, ou incomplets sur 
 les monuments.’ Ina work of great interest 
 and importance published lately by M. Chabas, 
 he reiterates this assertion, and rejects all the 
 dates derived from astronomical notices. See 
 ‘Voyage d’un Egyptien,’ p. 26.44 ‘This un- 
 certainty must always be borne in mind: the 
 dates derived from Egyptian monuments may 
 be implicitly relied upon so far as they go, 
 but, with one exception already noticed, they 
 never refer to any general epoch, and do not 
 supply materials for a complete chronological 
 arrangement of events under either of the 
 dynasties with which we are at present con- 
 cerned. 
 
 Egyptian scholars have hitherto been divided 
 between two opinions, some recognising in 
 Aahmes, or Amosis, the first sovereign of the 
 eighteenth dynasty, the first persecutor of 
 the Israelites, and in one of his descendants 
 the Pharaoh of the Exodus; others regard- 
 ing the third sovereign of the nineteenth 
 dynasty, z.c. Rameses II., the Sesostris of the 
 Greeks, and his son Merneptah, or his grand- 
 son Seti, as the contemporaries of Moses. 
 We will examine the grounds on which each 
 of these opinions rests; and proceeding in 
 order of time will first inquire into the claims 
 of the eighteenth dynasty. 
 
 (12.) The circumstances under which 
 Aahmes I. the Amosis of Josephus, obtained 
 possession of Lower Egypt, make it extremely 
 probable that he should have adopted such 
 measures towards the Israelites as are de- 
 scribed in the beginning of Exodus. 
 
 His accession constitutes one of the most 
 important epochs in Egyptian history ; with 
 it terminates the broken and confused period 
 of the ancient Empire; with it begins a 
 continuous series of events under succes- 
 sive dynasties. Previous to his accession, or 
 shortly afterwards, he married an Ethiopian 
 Princess, Nefertari, whose name and portrait 
 are found on many monuments,* in which she 
 
 44 A single clear notice of a solar eclipse would 
 settle a vast number of questions. M. Chabas 
 has completely shown that hitherto none has 
 been found (see ‘ Zeitschrift,’ May, 1868). On 
 the various attempts to establish a system on 
 astronomical calculations, see Mr. Browne in 
 Kitto’s ‘ Cyclopezedia,’ vol. iii. p. 52. 
 
 45 One of the most striking portraits of 
 Nefertari is the first plate in the third volume of 
 Lepsius’ ‘Denkmialer.’ See also a coloured tablet 
 in the British Museum. She is there represented 
 as jet black, but not with negro features. She 
 was probably of the higher Nubian race. It 
 has been observed that the portraits of the earlier 
 
UPON THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 is represented as a personage of singular dis- 
 tinction, daughter, wife, sister, and mother of 
 kings, and worshipped centuries after her 
 death as a tutelary deity. It is inferred, 
 with great probability, that this alliance with 
 
 Ethiopia, which under the ancient empire had 
 
 furnished large contingents of auxiliary troops 
 to Egypt, supplied Aahmes with resources 
 which enabled him soon after his accession to 
 undertake an expedition against the Northern 
 dynasty. ‘That expedition was completely suc- 
 cessful: it terminated the struggle. A con- 
 temporary inscription on the tomb of one of 
 his chief officers (the naval captain Ahmes), 
 gives an account of the siege of Avaris, of a 
 battle fought in its vicinity, and of the capture 
 of that city, the stronghold of Apepi. It also 
 informs us that the expulsion of the enemy 
 was followed by an expedition to the borders 
 of Canaan, when Sarouhen was taken by 
 storm.*” 
 
 It is at once clear that the expressions used 
 in Exodus to describe the Pharaoh by whom 
 the Israelites were first persecuted, apply, in 
 the fullest and most literal sense, to this 
 sovereign. ‘To the people of the greater part 
 of Egypt, and most especially to the inhabit- 
 ants of the North, he was emphatically “a 
 new king:” of him it might be said, as of no 
 native king, succeeding without a struggle (as 
 was most especially the case of Rameses II.), 
 “he arose up over” Egypt; he was, in the true 
 sense of the word, like the Norman William, 
 a conqueror. ‘The name of Joseph, whether 
 as a minister of the ejected dynasty, or of one 
 more ancient than that, would probably be 
 
 kings of the dynasty bear distinct traces of black 
 blood. Rosellini gives a portrait of Amenophis I. 
 (whom, however, he confounds with Aahmes), 
 in which he is represented asa black. ‘ Monum. 
 R.,’ pl. xxix. At Karnak there is a representa- 
 tion of the shrine of Nefertari borne by twelve 
 priests; she is there associated with Rameses II., 
 after an interval of some three centuries. 
 
 46 M. de Rougé gives a very curious account 
 of the organisation of a negro army, under Pepi, 
 of the sixth dynasty. As in our Indian posses- 
 sions, these alien troops were drilled and com- 
 manded by native Egyptians. See ‘Recherches,’ 
 
 SELLE 
 i 47 This is a very important point. It shows 
 the inaccuracy of the account given by Josephus 
 from Manetho, and, before this inscription was 
 known, adopted by Egyptian scholars, viz., that 
 the war between upper and lower Egypt con- 
 tinued to the third or fourth reign of the 
 eighteenth dynasty. There can be no question 
 as to the correctness of the contemporary inscrip- 
 tion. Ptolemy, a priest of Mendes, quoted by 
 Apion (ap. Clem. Alex. ‘Sor.,’ 1, 21, p. 178, ed. 
 Potter), says of Amosis that he karécxaye thy 
 Aiapi. He was better informed than Manetho. 
 M. de Rougé justly claims the credit of having 
 proved this capital point (question capitale). 
 See the ‘ Report on Egyptian Studies’ for 1867, 
 p- 18; and compare M. Chabas, ‘ Les Pasteurs 
 en Egypte,’ 1868, where the whole inscription is 
 translated, 
 
 453 
 
 unknown to him. Nor can there be any 
 reasonable doubt as to the feelings with which 
 a king in his position must have regarded the 
 Israelites. ‘There is no question as to his 
 finding them in Goshen; that is admitted 
 by all“* They were there as the subjects, 
 apparently the favoured subjects, of the ex- 
 pelled dynasty, under whom they retained 
 undisturbed possession of the richest district 
 of Egypt, commanding the western approach 
 to the very heart of the land. ‘The first point 
 that would naturally strike him would be 
 their number (Exod. 1. 9), which, after the 
 expulsion of his enemies, would bear an 
 alarming proportion to the native population 
 of the Delta. A prudent man under such 
 circumstances would not be likely to provoke 
 rebellion by proceeding to extremities, but 
 nothing is more probable than that he should 
 do just what Moses tells us the new king 
 actually did, deal with them craftily, prevent 
 their increase, utilise their labour, and cut off 
 all communication with foreigners. The most 
 advantageous employment which would sug- 
 gest itself would of course be the construction 
 of stronyly-fortified depositaries of provisions 
 and arms near the eastern frontier. ‘The line 
 of fortresses was enlarged and strengthened 
 by Rameses II., but that king was not the 
 original founder. ‘Traces are found which 
 prove the existerce both of the canal and of 
 several forts under the ancient empire.” One 
 of these forts, bearing the name Pa-chtum en 
 Zaru, is mentioned in the monumental annals 
 of Thotmes III. It is identified by M. Brugsch 
 with the Pithom of the Exodus.°? ‘The 
 name signifies “the fortress of foreigners or 
 sojourners,” ze. a fortress either built by 
 foreigners or assigned to immigrants as a 
 
 48 7.¢, by M. de Rougé, Brugsch, &c. 
 
 49 An officer who fled from Egypt in the reign 
 of Osirtasin speaks of a wall which the king 
 had built to keep off the Sakti, z.e, Asiatic in- 
 vaders. See the story of Saneha ; and Chabas, 
 ‘Voyage d’un Egyptien,’ p. 293; and on the 
 Sakti, p. 321. Drs Ebers, 1. c. p. 81, entirely 
 corroborates the view taken by the writer, He 
 shows that the line, previously existing, must 
 have been strengthened by one of the earliest 
 kings of the eighteenth dynasty, and completed 
 in all probability by the fortress, called the fort, 
 or the ‘‘close” of Zar. The word rendered ‘‘fort,”’ 
 viz. chetem, is retained in Coptic, as (yt RH, 
 or TURK, to shut. This fort is very specially 
 the key of Egypt, 7 KAels r7s Alydrrou, the fron- 
 tier station for the armies of the Pharaohs, and 
 for Asiatic immigrants. ’ 
 
 50 This identification is not accepted ‘by M. 
 Chabas, who gives another and more probable 
 etymology for the Hebrew Pithom, viz. the 
 sanctuary of Tum. But it is probable, indeed all 
 but certain, that the fortress and the sanctuary 
 were contiguous, and formed together the princi- 
 pal rendezvous of the Egyptian troops and foreign 
 embassies on the frontier. On the name Raamses, 
 see infra, under Rameses. 
 
454 
 
 residence.*t We learn from Genesis that 
 Raamses was the name of the district in 
 the time of Jacob, and from the Egyptian 
 monuments that one of the sons of Aahmes 
 was named Rames; probable grounds are 
 thus found for the designation of the second 
 fort built at the same time. It is also well 
 known that during the latter part of his reign 
 Aahmes was occupied in building and repair- 
 ing the cities of Northern Egypt. In an 
 inscription lately deciphered,*? dated in his 
 twenty-second year, certain Fenchu are stated 
 to be employed in the transport of blocks of 
 limestone from the quarries of Rufu (the 
 Troja of Strabo) to Memphis and other cities. 
 These Fenchu are unquestionably aliens, either 
 mercenaries or forced labourers. According 
 to Brugsch, the name means “ bearers of the 
 shepherd’s_ staff;” and he describes their 
 occupation as precisely corresponding to that 
 of the Israelites. No proper name for the 
 Israelites is found on the monuments of the 
 eighteenth dynasty ; °4 during which period all 
 Egyptologers admit their presence in Egypt: 
 they could certainly not be designated more 
 exactly whether we regard the name or the 
 occupation of these Fenchu. 
 
 (13.) It has been shown that little depend- 
 ence can be placed on systems of Egyptian 
 chronology, yet it may be observed that either 
 of those which are most generally accepted is 
 quite reconcileable with this hypothesis. 
 
 Two dates, which differ very widely, are 
 given, not as certain, but approximative and 
 probable. 
 
 Brugsch, following Lepsius, fixes the acces- 
 sion of Aahmes I. at 1706 B.c. This would 
 be in very near accordance with Hebrew 
 history if the dates drawn from notices in the 
 Book of Judges were accepted in preference 
 to that given in 1 Kings vi. The last year of 
 Thotmes II., which, as will be shown, is very 
 
 51 This is a point of considerable importance, 
 brought out by Brugsch in the third volume of 
 the ‘Geographische Inschriften,’ p. 21. He 
 says, ‘‘I believe that I am nearer than formerly 
 to the trace of the meaning of this name. The 
 old Egyptian Zaru, or Zalu, is evidently related to 
 
 the Coptic XU TAI, whence PEARAWIAT, 
 
 peregrinus, advena,” 
 
 52 See Brugsch, ‘ Zeitschrift’ for November, 
 1867. 
 
 53 Brugsch observes, ‘*‘ With this name are 
 designated the pastoral and nomad tribes of 
 Semitic origin, who lived in the neighbourhood 
 of Egypt, and who are to be thought of as stand- 
 ing to Egypt in the same relation as the Jews,” 
 l.c. p. 92. This is the more important since 
 Brugsch does not connect the narrative of 
 Exodus with this period. 
 
 54 On the name ‘‘ Aperu,” supposed to repre- 
 sent Hebrews, see further on. It is found first 
 in papyri of a later date, under the nineteenth 
 dynasty. 
 
 ON THE BEARINGS ‘OF EGYPTIAN HiSteae: 
 
 probably that of the Exodus, falls on the same 
 system in 1647 B.C. Now, the interval between 
 the building of the Temple, about toro A.c., 
 and the Exodus, is calculated to amount to 
 638 years by the advocates of the longer 
 chronology: certainly a most remarkable co- 
 incidence, the more so since neither Brugsch 
 nor the other Egyptian chronologers adopt 
 that date for the Exodus. 
 
 The other date, given also approximately, 
 is 1525 B.C. for Aahmes I., and 1463 for the 
 last year of Thotmes II. This accords 
 pretty nearly with the shorter interval of 480 
 years given in 1 Kings vi. 1. 
 
 This later date has been lately supported in 
 a very remarkable way by a discovery which, 
 if it could be absolutely relied upon, would 
 settle the chronology.*®> Thotmes III. built a 
 temple at Elephantine: it has been destroyed 
 within the last few years by the natives, but 
 on one stone found near the ruins the name 
 of the king is distinctly read; on another 
 stone is an inscription stating that the 28th of 
 the month Epiphi was the festival of the rising 
 of Sothis, z e. Sirius. From this M. Biot 
 calculates the date, which he fixes as 1445 B.C, 
 Now the reign of Thotmes III. lasted about 
 forty-eight years; the temple was probably 
 built towards the end of his reign, which up to 
 the last seven years was occupied in foreign 
 warfare; we should thus get the date from 
 1485 to 1492 for thelast year of Thotmes II., 
 
 5° This date has given occasion to much con- 
 troversy. It is utterly irreconcileable with the 
 system of some chronologers. Lepsius at once 
 met it with the assumption that the Egyptian 
 sculptor committed the error of adding a line, 
 the effect of which would be to alter the 
 calculations to the extent of 130 years. 
 He was followed by Bunsen, and, though 
 with some misgiving, by Brugsch. If any 
 answer were needed, it might be given in the 
 words of M. de Rougé: ‘*Ce n’est pas ainsi 
 qu’on peut lever une difficulté de cette gravité : 
 le monument aujourd’hui a Paris est comme 
 gravure de la plus grande beauté ; il appartient 
 du reste 4 l’époque ot les inscriptions présentent 
 la correction la plus parfaite.” See also M. 
 Chabas, M.E. ii. p. 18. A more serious objection 
 has since been raised and defended with great abi- 
 lity by M. Chabas. Theinscription which gives the 
 official name of Thotmes III., and that which gives 
 the name of the month on which the caiculation is 
 based, are on different stones, and cannot be proved 
 to refer to the same date. The latter may possi- 
 bly refer to additions to the temple. M. Chabas 
 writes with a strong bias, so much so that he 
 even attempts to explain away the well-known 
 phrase for the coming forth or heliacal rising of 
 Sothis ; and Mr. Goodwin, a very high authority, 
 does not consider that he has proved his points. 
 In the present state of the question, all that we 
 are entitled to assume is that the inscriptions 
 may probably refer to the same time, viz. that 
 of the erection of the temple, and give a date 
 which presents a very striking coincidence with 
 that taken from the statement in 1 Kings vi. 
 
UPON THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 a date exactly in accordance with that derived 
 from 1 Kings vi. 1.56 
 
 In the present state of inquiry it is suffi- 
 cient to point out the singular accordance 
 between two very different systems of Biblical 
 and Egyptian chronology, whichever may be 
 ultimately adopted. 
 
 (14.) Assuming for the present that the perse- 
 cution of the Israelites began under Aahmes 
 I., the question still remains under which of 
 his successors the Exodus took place. In the 
 absence of monumental evidence the question 
 cannot be decisively settled, but there appear 
 to be substantial grounds for the conclusion 
 that it occurred at the close of the reign of 
 Thotmes II. 
 
 The length of the interval between the 
 accession of Aahmes I. and of Thotmes III. 
 cannot be accurately determined. The calcu- 
 lations of Brugsch (which are quite irrespective 
 of our question) give an interval of eighty-one 
 
 years. According to Josephus, Manetho gives © 
 
 Ioo years 5 months for the period between 
 the expulsion of the shepherds and the acces- 
 sion of the Pharaoh whom he calls Mephra- 
 muthosis. These dates are wholly uncertain, 
 each recension of Manetho giving different 
 numbers; but the interval probably extended 
 over one hundred years. ‘This coincides very 
 closely with the period required by the Scrip- 
 tural narrative: some years elapsed before the 
 birth of Moses, eighty years between his 
 birth and the Exodus. 
 
 ' (15.) The events of the succeeding reigns 
 under which Moses must have lived, assuming 
 the correctness of this hypothesis, accord with 
 inferences suggested by the brief narrative of 
 Exodus, and also with notices in Josephus, 
 which though of a legendary character may 
 have some foundation in facts. On the death 
 of Aahmes the government appears to have 
 been in the hands of Nefertari, the Ethiopian 
 princess, either as sovereign, or more probably 
 as regent.>7 Little was known of Amenophis 
 
 56 A very curious corroboration of this hypo- 
 thesis may be drawn from some calculations of 
 Mr. Goodwin in the ‘Zeitschrift’ for 1867, p. 
 78. Heshows that, if certain data are admitted, 
 one of the following dates would fall within the 
 reign of Thotmes III., viz. 1481, 1480, 1479, 
 1478. He says, *‘ According to the system of 
 some of the chronologists this would suit the 
 reign of Thotmes III.” It certainly suits that 
 chronology of the Bible which appears most 
 probable to the writer of this Essay. On 
 grounds quite independent of the astronomical 
 calculation, he would have us go back 120 years, 
 and take 1601, 1600, 1599, 1598 as the date, 
 fixing the accession of Thotmes III. as 1623, 
 1622, 1621, or 1620, This, as he points out, 
 agrees very nearly with the date of Brugsch, viz. 
 1625 A.c. It certainly agrees also with the 
 system of those chronologers who adopt the 
 longer interval. 
 
 57 It isan obvious conjecture that such an asso- 
 ciation may have had some influence upon the 
 
 455 
 
 (or Amenhotep) her son, until the following 
 facts were elicited from contemporary monu- 
 ments. Ahmes, the naval officer already 
 mentioned, went with Amenophis in an expe- 
 dition into Ethiopia against an insurgent 
 chieftain. The expedition was successful. 
 Josephus gives a long and evidently legendarv 
 account of an expedition of Moses into 
 Ethiopia. As a member of the royal house- 
 hold, the adopted child of the King’s sister, 
 he would naturally accompany his master; 
 while gratitude to his benefactress would 
 of course give additional impetus to his efforts 
 against an Ethiopian rebel. Amenophis was 
 undoubtedly an able and prosperous king, 
 leaving a great name, and worshipped as a god 
 in after ages. 
 
 The circumstances which led to the flight 
 of Moses may have taken place at the close of 
 this reign.°® Syncellus mentions a tradition 
 that Moses left the court after the death 
 of Amosis and of his daughter, whom he 
 calls Pharie: it is more probable that this 
 occurred some years later, since Moses could 
 not have reached manhood when Aahmes 
 died. _ At the death of Amenophis he would 
 be about forty. It has been represented as 
 improbable that the adopted son of Pharaoh’s 
 daughter found no protector when he slew an 
 Egyptian subject, a most unreasonable objec- 
 tion even if the princess were still living; her 
 death would of course leave him friendless. 
 
 (16.) During the reign of Thotmes I., Moses, 
 on this supposition, must have been in Midian, 
 but the events are not without bearings upon 
 his history. The reign was one of great 
 prosperity. ‘The complete subjugation of the 
 district between Upper Egypt and Nubia 
 Proper is attested by the inscirption previously 
 quoted and by another found by the Prussian 
 expedition on the rock opposite the island of 
 Tombos.*? The latter years of his reign® were 
 employed in a war of greater interest. We 
 learn from the sepulchral inscription already 
 mentioned that he invaded Mesopotamia, won 
 a great victory, and brought back an immense 
 number of captives. A great advance was 
 thus made in the condition of Egypt. Its 
 
 feelings of Moses when in later years he married 
 an Ethiopian. 
 
 58 All the recensions of Manetho give thirteen 
 years for Chebron, z.e. Nefertari (see above), and 
 twenty-one for Amenophis. Moses is said to 
 have been forty years old at the time of his 
 flight. The coincidence of dates is perfect, as 
 he was in all probability born a few years before 
 the death of Aahmes, 
 
 59 Ethiopia was henceforth governed by princes 
 of the blood royal. A list of twenty, bearing 
 the style Prince Royal of Cush, beginning with 
 this reign, is drawn from the monuments. The 
 first bears the name Me-Mes, an odd coincidence. 
 See ‘ Exc.’ on Moses. 
 
 60 The duration of the reign is uncertain ; the 
 monuments give no information, and the dates 
 of Manetho are in utter confusion. 
 
456 
 
 permanent resources were increased by the 
 acquisition of Nubia, the land of gold,” and 
 henceforth we find the Pharaohs in possession 
 of numerous chariots, which, though not 
 unknown,” are not represented on early 
 monuments. We have here every indication 
 of national greatness. 
 
 (17.) On the death of Thotmes I. the govern- 
 ment was once more for some years in the 
 hands of a woman. His wife and sister 
 Aahmes,® called Amessis by Josephus, was 
 regent or sovereign, according to Manetho, 
 for upwards of twenty years. ‘Thotmes II. 
 showed energy in the beginning of his reign; 
 he carried on a successful war against the 
 Shasous, the nomad tribes on the north-eastern 
 frontier. No other notice is found of his acts 
 on the monuments. His reign was probably 
 short and certainly inglorious. ‘The following 
 facts are however certain from contemporary 
 monuments. He was married to his sister 
 Hatasou;° after his decease, of which the 
 circumstances are unknown, she succeeded 
 him as Queen Regnant. His death was im- 
 mediately followed by a general revolt of the 
 
 61 Nub is the well-known Egyptian name for 
 gold. 
 
 62 The war chariot of Aahmes I. is expressly 
 mentioned in the inscription at Elkab. 
 
 63 In these reigns there are several instances 
 of marriages between brother and sister. M. de 
 Rougé observes that it does not appear to have 
 been a custom under the early Pharaohs.— 
 * Recherches,’ p. 62. 
 
 6¢ The joint reigns of Amesses and Mephres, 
 or Misaphris, are computed at thirty-five or thirty- 
 three years in the tables of Bunsen, from Jose- 
 phus and Africanus. Eusebius omits both 
 Thotmes I. and Amesses. We may not place any 
 reliance on the numbers of Manetho, but they 
 were probably taken from old monuments, 
 and, though often corrupted and distorted, may 
 occasionally be correct. In this case they coin- 
 cide very strikingly with the narrative of Exodus, 
 allowing an interval of some forty years between 
 the decease of Amenophis and of Thotmes II. 
 
 63 According to the monuments, Thotmes II., 
 his wife Hatasou, and Thotmes III., were 
 children of the same parent or parents. If the 
 joint reigns of Amesses and Thotmes II. extended 
 over thirty years, or even a much shorter period, 
 Thotmes III. could not have been the son of 
 Thotmes I., since he was a mere child at the 
 death of Thotmes I]. He is represented as a 
 boy of.some ten or twelve years old, sitting on 
 the knees of Hatasou, on the monuments. If 
 we might assume that Thotmes II. and his wife 
 were children of Thotmes I. and Amesses, and 
 that Thotmes III. was a son of Amesses by 
 another husband, this would meet the difficulty. 
 It is certain that Thotmes II. was son of 
 Thotmes I, See ‘Denkméaler,’ iii. pl. xvi. 
 psp is 
 66 This is probably the true reading of the name, 
 which means ‘‘ chief of the illustrious.” The 
 phonetic value of one of the signs is disputed by 
 Mr. Goodwin, but is shown to be correct by 
 Renouf and Lauth. 
 
 leurs défaites.” 
 
 ON THE BEARINGS OF EGYPTIAN HISTORY 
 
 confederatéd nations on the north of Palestine, 
 which had been conquered by his father: no 
 attempt was made to recover the lost as- 
 cendancy of Egypt until the 22nd year of 
 Thotmes IIT. 
 
 Certainly no conjunction of circumstances 
 can be conceived which would adjust itself 
 more naturally to the Scriptural narrative, if 
 we assume that the Exodus took place at this 
 time. - Ina history drawn entirely from public 
 inscriptions and monuments, no one would 
 expect to find records of events humiliating to 
 the national pride: a period of heavy and 
 disgraceful calamity would present but a 
 blank.” Now the reigns of all other early 
 kings in this great dynasty were prosperous 
 and glorious, filled with great events attested 
 by numerous monuments. ‘This king suc- 
 ceeded to a great place; his first years were 
 brilliant, he cleared his frontiers: there is mo 
 indication of rebellion or of foreign invasion, 
 and yet the last years are a complete blank: 
 there is a sudden and complete collapse: ® he 
 dies, no son succeeding: his throne is long 
 occupied by a woman: and no effort is made 
 to regain the former possessions of Egypt for 
 more than twenty years. We have ample 
 space for the events which preceded the 
 Exodus; we find the conditions presupposed in 
 the accounts of the mission of Moses, and the 
 results which might have been anticipated 
 from calamities which, though not sufficient to 
 crush the nation, would cripple its resources, 
 and for a time subdue its spirit. 
 
 Assuming for the present the truth of this 
 hypothesis, we may consider what might be 
 the probable course of events. On the return 
 of Moses from Midian, in the eightieth year 
 of his age, and therefore towards the close of 
 the reign of Thotmes II., he found the Pharaoh 
 in lower Egypt, probably at Zoan (see Psalm 
 Ixxvili. 12), ze. Tanis, or as the Egyptians call 
 it Avaris, the city captured by his ancestor. 
 The residence of the court for a great part of 
 the year would naturally be in that district. 
 The upper country was quiet after the 
 conquest of Nubia, whereas the territory 
 occupied by the Israelites required watching, 
 and the neighbouring Shasous, or Bedouins, 
 caused constant alarms. ‘The character of 
 the king as described in Exodus was at once 
 weak and obstinate, cruel and capricious, 
 
 ~ 
 
 67 M. de Rougé, speaking of the name Aperu 
 (see further on), observes, ‘‘ C’est la seule trace 
 que la captivité d’Israel aura laissée probable- 
 ment sur les monuments: il n’est pas a penser 
 que les Egyptiens y aient jamais consigne ni-le 
 souvenir des plaies, ni celui de la catastrophe 
 terrible de la Mer Rouge; car leurs monuments 
 ne consacrent que bien rarement le souvenir de 
 See also the memoir lately 
 published (1869), * Moise et les Hébreux,’ p. 2. 
 
 68 M. Brugsch says strongly and truly, ‘as it 
 Seems, all that had been previously conquered 
 was completely lost.—‘ Geographie,’ i. p. 54. 
 
UPON THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 such a character as is calculated to provoke 
 or accelerate great national calamities. Nor 
 can we lose sight altogether of the queen. 
 She was a very remarkable woman, daughter, 
 sister, and wife of kings, with the antecedents 
 of her mother and grandmother, both of 
 whom had been regents, and she was able to 
 retain the government of the nation during the 
 prolonged minority of the greatest and most 
 energetic king of the dynasty. Such a woman 
 may well have helped her brother and husband 
 to “harden his heart,” after each ague fit of 
 misgiving and terror. ‘That she was a woman 
 of strong religious prejudices is proved by her 
 own inscriptions: as such she could not but be 
 revolted by the insults heaped upon the sooth- 
 sayers, priests, temples, and idols of Egypt. 
 When her heart was crushed by the loss of her 
 first-born son, we can conceive the mingled 
 feelings which would send her to the king, if 
 not to suggest, yet to strengthen his resolution 
 to make one more effort to save his kingdom 
 from disgrace, and to avenge the long series 
 of calamities upon Israel.® These are of course 
 but conjectures, but they rest upon facts dis- 
 tinctly recorded on contemporary Egyptian 
 monuments, and they harmonize thoroughly 
 with the narrative of Exodus. 
 
 The history of the next reign supplies some 
 remarkable coincidences. 
 
 (18.) Thotmes III.remained in reluctant sub- 
 jection to his sister at least seventeen years.” 
 On taking possession of the throne he defaced 
 her titles on the monuments, and reckoned his 
 own reign from the death of his predecessor, 
 without any notice of the intervening period. 
 It may be inferred from this that her rule was 
 distasteful to the people, associated, it may 
 be, with national disasters. It is certain that 
 during her regency there was a general revolt 
 and confederacy of the nations on the north- 
 west of Egypt from Palestine to Mesopotamia. 
 
 It was not until the twenty-second year of 
 his reign—a date, as will appear, of singular 
 importance in this inquiry—that ‘Thotmes III. 
 began a series of expeditions unparalleled for 
 extent and grandeur in Egyptian history.” 
 
 The following facts are clearly proved. 
 
 69 The inscriptions on her obelisk, the most 
 beautiful now remaining at Thebes, give a strong 
 impression of this queen’s character. She speaks 
 of her favour with Ammon, boasts of her gra- 
 cious and popular manners, and is represented 
 in this, and also in other monuments, in mascu- 
 line attire, including @ beard. See the inscrip- 
 tions in the ‘Zeitschrift’ for 1865, p. 34, and 
 Brugsch, ‘ Recueil,’ ii. p. 79. 
 
 70 Dr. Birch finds a higher date for the joint 
 government, twenty-one years, 
 
 71 A full account of these expeditions was in- 
 scribed on the walls of a temple dedicated to 
 Ammon.after his last return to Egypt. They 
 are given by Lepsius in the ‘Denkmaler,’ vol. iii., 
 and in the ‘Auswahl ;’ some are published by 
 Brugsch, ‘ Recueil,’ and by M. de Rougé, ‘ Etude 
 
 457 
 
 The king left Zaru, or Pithom, early in the 
 year, and advanced without encountering any 
 opposition to Sarouhen on the southern fron- 
 tier of Palestine. He was detained by the 
 siege of Gaza, which he took early in the 
 spring of the following year. On the 16th of 
 Pachon, early in March, at a fort named 
 Souhem, he heard of the advance of the allied 
 kings of all the districts between the Euphrates 
 and the Mediterranean. ‘The decisive battle 
 was fought at Megiddo, the earliest and one 
 of the most important of the conflicts in that 
 great battle-field of Western Asia. The allies 
 were completely defeated, the dead covered the 
 plain, horses and chariots” in vast numbers 
 were taken, and on the following day the 
 chiefs, who had fled to Megiddo, came to 
 offer submission and tributes, consisting of 
 gold, silver, bronze, lapis-lazuli, coffers of pre- 
 cious metals, chariots plated with gold and 
 silver, magnificent vases of Phoenician work- 
 manship, a harp of bronze inlaid with gold, 
 ivory, perfumes, and wine. The proofs of an 
 advanced civilisation inthe nations then domi- 
 nant in Palestine accord with all the repre- 
 sentations in Scripture. ‘The point, however, 
 of main importance in the present inquiry is 
 that the power of the confederacy which gave 
 unity and strength to the people of Canaan 
 was completely broken by ‘Thotmes III., just 
 seventeen years before the date when, on the 
 hypothesis we are now considering, the Israel- 
 ites entered Palestine. 
 
 The ineursions of Thotmes continued 
 without intermission during this interval. 
 We have accounts of repeated invasions of 
 Pheenicia, conquests over the Rutens™ in 
 Mesopotamia, where the king established a 
 fortress or military colony: we find the 
 great names of Assur, Babel, Nineveh, Shinear, 
 the Remenen, or Armenians, and most fre- 
 quently of the Cheta, the sons of Heth, 
 the Hittites of Scripture.” 
 
 sur divers monuments. du régne de Toutmés III,’ 
 1861. Mr. Birch first encountered, and to a great 
 extent overcame, the formidable difficulties of 
 decipherment and translation. His labours, and 
 those of M. de Rougé and Brugsch, have made 
 them accessible to students. 
 
 72 892 chariots are mentioned ; a very curious 
 coincidence with the statement in Judges v., 
 where we are told that Jabin, in the same battle- 
 field, had goo chariots, 
 
 a eee aa = 9 
 has proved, designates the northern Syrians. 
 The name may be read Lutennu, or even Lu- 
 dennu, and is identified with Lud by M. de 
 Rougemont, ‘Age du Bronze.’ The presence of 
 Egyptians in Mesopotamia under the eighteenth 
 dynasty, and in the time of Thotmes III., is 
 proved by scarabei found at Arban, on the 
 Cabus, a tributary of the Euphrates. 
 
 74 M. Chabas denies the'identity of the Hittites 
 with the Cheta, chiefly on philological grounds, 
 since the names, of which several are given, indi- 
 
 Rutennu, as M. Chabas 
 
458 
 
 One object was steadily pursued by the 
 king during these campaigns. In accordance 
 with the ancient policy of the Pharaohs,” but 
 as it would seem because such a measure was 
 especially important at that time, and probably 
 one main motive for the repeated razzias, 
 Thotmes brought an immense number of 
 captives into Egypt. These are his own 
 words: 76 “J made a great offering to Ammon 
 in recognition of the first victory which he 
 granted me, filling his domain with slaves, to 
 make him stuffs of various materials, to labour 
 and cultivate the lands, to make harvests, to 
 fill the habitation of Father Ammon.” At 
 Abd el Kurna, in the temple before mentioned, 
 there is a well-known picture of such captives 
 employed in making bricks. It is an ad- 
 mirable illustration of the labours of the 
 Israelites, whom it was formerly supposed to 
 represent: the inscription, however, states that 
 they are “ captives taken by his Majesty to build 
 the temple of his Father Ammon.” 
 
 We have now to call special attention to 
 this fact. The wars of Thotmes III. were 
 terminated by the complete overthrow of all 
 his foes in Syria and Mesopotamia in the 
 fortieth year of his reign. No question is 
 raised about this date. But according to our 
 present hypothesis this took place exactly forty 
 years after the Exodus, immediately before 
 the entrance of the Israelites into Palestine. 
 
 They would then have found the country 
 in a state of utter prostration. With the 
 exception of such strongholds as might be 
 retained by the Egyptians to command the road 
 into Syria, the petty kings would keep each 
 his own fortress, with no common head, no 
 powerful ally, accustomed to see their neigh- 
 bours and kinsmen beaten and subjugated, and, 
 though warlike, well supplied with arms, and 
 occupying forts well-nigh impregnable,”® yet 
 habituated to defeat, and liable, as the Scrip- 
 
 cate a different origin. Most Egyptologers, 
 however, retain the older view, which is de- 
 fended by very convincing arguments by M. de 
 Rougé. It is confirmed also by the Assyrian 
 inscriptions, which make the Khati or Hatti 
 occupy the country between the Mediterranean 
 and Carchemish, their frontier city in the times 
 of Tiglath Pileser I., see Rawlinson’s ‘ Ancient 
 Monarchies,’ vol. ii. pp. 315, 317, and Menant, 
 ‘Syllabaire Assyrien,’ p. 155, who identifies 
 them with the Hittites. The identification of the 
 Remenen is proposed by Brugsch. 
 
 7° We have a very early record of this policy 
 in the reign of Pepi, of the sixth dynasty. See 
 M. de Rougé, ‘ Recherches,’ p. 128. 
 
 , 7% See Brugsch, ‘Recueil de Monuments 
 Egyptiens,’ vol. i. p. 53- 
 
 “7 See Brugsch, ‘ Recueil,’ i. p. 53. 
 
 78 The history of the siege of Gaza, which 
 lasted more than a year, may account for the 
 Egyptians leaving so many cities untouched, re- 
 taining a partial or entire independence. This 
 applies to campaigns under the nineteenth and 
 twentieth dynasties, 
 
 ON THE BEARINGS. OF EGYPTIAN: HISTORY 
 
 tural narrative describes them, to wild fits of 
 panic at the approach of a new foe. If 
 again, as there is reason to believe, the kings 
 of Bashan, and other districts east of the 
 Jordan, were among the confederates defeated . 
 on his first invasion by Thotmes, it would 
 account for their exhaustion, and the extreme 
 terror of the princes of Midian 2nd Moab.” 
 
 (19.) It may be asked how could the I[srael- 
 ites during that period escape the notice of the 
 king? Itis certain that the high road, always 
 followed by the Egyptian armies, ran along 
 the coast of the Mediterranean till it turned 
 off towards Megiddo. The Israelites were 
 in the desert of Tih, a district not easily 
 accessible and offering no temptation to a 
 conqueror whose energies were concentrated 
 in a desperate war. Had they remained in 
 the peninsula of Sinai they would have been 
 within his reach, for its western district was 
 subject to Egypt from a very early period.® 
 It is possible that their flight might have been 
 one motive for an expedition which, as we 
 learn from an inscription in the Wady 
 Mughara, was undertaken by the forces of 
 Hatasou and Thotmes in the sixteenth year 
 of their joint reign. 
 
 A far more serious objection rests on the 
 improbability that the powerful kings of the 
 eighteenth and nineteenth dynasties would 
 have permitted the invasion or the continued 
 occupation of Palestine by the Israelites. 
 
 We might answer in the first place that 
 this objection applies to every other date 
 suggested by chronologers. ‘The very latest 
 date assumes that the Exodus took place under 
 the son or grandson of Rameses II., and that 
 the Israelites passed the Jordan in the time 
 of Rameses I1I. But that Pharaoh was one 
 of the most powerful sovereigns of Egypt, 
 and it is certain that his descendants, the 
 princes of the twentieth dynasty, retained 
 command of the communications by land and 
 water with Mesopotamia. ‘This is proved by 
 
 79 ‘This gives a peculiar force and suitableness 
 to the words of Balaam, twice repeated, ‘‘ God 
 brought them out of Egypt. He hath, as it 
 were, the strength of an unicorn.” Num. xxiii. 
 22, xxiv. 8. 
 
 80 The intercourse between Egypt and the 
 west of the peninsula began under Snefru, the 
 last Pharaoh of the third dynasty. He defeated 
 the Anu, the ancient inhabitants, and founded 
 a colony at the Wady Mughara. The most 
 ancient monument in existence records this 
 event. The copper-mines there were worked 
 under Chufu (Cheops) and other sovereigns of 
 the fourth and following dynasties. We read 
 of a formal inspection by Pepi. See M. de Rouge, 
 ‘Recherches,’ pp. 7,. 30, 31, 42, Ol; 115.0 ae 
 mines were worked under Amenemha, twelfth 
 dynasty, and the influence or sovereignty of 
 Egypt continued unbroken till long after the 
 Exodus. M. Chabas shows that under the 
 twentieth dynasty the communications were 
 regularly carried on. 
 
UPON THE PENDLATEUCH, 
 
 an inscription of great interest and import- 
 ance, well known to Egyptian scholars, which 
 belongs to the reign of Rameses XII., towards 
 the close of the dynasty. M. de Rougé™ 
 says, “‘ Elle suppose une domination encore 
 incontestée sur la Mesopotamie, des relations 
 amicales entre les princes d’ Asie et le Pharaon, 
 ainsi que des routes habituellement parcourues 
 par le commerce.” However it may be 
 accounted for, it is certain that during the 
 whole period between Joshua and Rehoboam 
 the Israelites were not disturbed in the posses- 
 sion of the strongholds of Palestine, although 
 the Pharaohs, as we have just seen, retained 
 an undisputed supremacy in Western Asia up 
 to the time of Samuel or Saul. 
 
 There are, however, facts, which, though 
 seldom noticed, are sufficiently obvious, and 
 may enable us to understand the policy of the 
 Pharaohs. 
 
 It is clear, even from the history of the 
 campaigns of Thotmes III., that at the end of 
 each campaign the Egyptians withdrew their 
 forces altogether from the countries which 
 they overran, content with the plunder, and 
 especially the capture of prisoners, with the 
 submission of the chiefs, and the tributes 
 which they were secure of exacting. ‘This 
 might be a result of the constitution of the 
 Egyptian armies. The Calasirians and Her- 
 motybians, the warrior caste, had settled 
 homes to which they would certainly choose 
 to return, probably each year after the sub- 
 sidence of the inundation, when their labours 
 would be required for the cultivation of the 
 fields. We have no trace of permanent occu- 
 pancy of foreign stations, excepting one in 
 Mesopotamia, another at the copper-mines in 
 the Wady Mughara, and perhaps of a few 
 fortresses on the route through Syria. <A 
 rapid campaign directed against the nations 
 to the north of Palestine, who were in a state 
 of chronic insurrection, and threw off the 
 yoke at every opportunity, would give an 
 Egyptian king neither the leisure nor the 
 inclination to assail the strongholds occupied 
 by the Israelites. 
 mind that the Israelites attacked the most 
 powerful enemies of Egypt, the Hittites and 
 Amorites, and that, whereas their conquest 
 certainly did not result in the establishment 
 of a formidable. empire, it was an effectual 
 check to the restoration and consolidation of 
 the powers which Thotmes had overthrown. 
 ‘We do not find notices of many incursions 
 under the immediate successors of ‘Thotmes. 
 That which is recorded, under Amenophis IL., 
 appears from the inscription® to have been 
 
 - 81 *Journal Asiatique,’ 5th series, vol. viii. 
 , 204. 
 
 ~ 82 The word used in reference to the invasions 
 
 of Asia in the reigns of Amenophis II. and IIL, is 
 
 t § 4 qe ; which indicates a naval expe- 
 
 dition, See ‘Denkmiler,’ iii. pl. 82. M. 
 
 It must also be borne in = 
 
 459 
 
 carried on by sea. The three invasions under the 
 nineteenth and twentieth dynasties, by Seti I., 
 Rameses II., and Rameses III., had each the 
 same general object, and was pursued on the 
 same system and with the same general results, 
 although as we shall find presently a con- 
 siderable number of Israelites were probably 
 carried into captivity by the two last-named 
 kings. 
 
 If the date which is here assumed be correct, 
 we shall expect that those events which are 
 ascertained from later Egyptian monuments 
 of the eighteenth and nineteenth dynasties will 
 harmonise with it. An absolute contradiction 
 would be fatal to the hypothesis, which of 
 course will be materially strengthened by 
 general and special coincidences. 
 
 (20.) Thereign of Thotmes III. was followed 
 by a period of great prosperity. ‘The supre- 
 macy of Egypt in Western Asia was unbroken, 
 certainly during the two following reigns. Is 
 this general statement compatible with the 
 conquest of Palestine by the Israelites? ‘To 
 answer this question we must look closely at 
 the events in each reign, not forgetting that, 
 as we have already shown, a general supre- 
 macy was undoubtedly retained from the 
 accession of the nineteenth to the termination 
 of the twentieth dynasty: that is throughout 
 the period which all chronologers hold to 
 have extended to the end of the book of 
 Judges. 
 
 Immediately after the accession of Ameno- 
 phis II. he undertook an expedition against 
 the Rutens. He appears to have advanced 
 as far as Nineveh; he certainly returned to 
 Egypt with the trophies of a great victory. 
 An inscription at Amada in Nubia, quoted 
 by M. Brugsch, ‘H. E,, p. rr1, and by M. 
 Chabas, ‘ Voyage d’un Egyptien,’ p. 194, states 
 that this king slew seven princes of the con- 
 federates at Tachis (a city in Syria), and that 
 “they were hung head downwards on the 
 prow of his Majesty’s ship.” 
 
 These facts are of considerable importance. 
 They show that the whole energies of the 
 Pharaohs were directed against the confede- 
 rates on the north of Palestine, whose defeat 
 and prostration would of course effectually 
 prevent them from marching into Palestine 
 
 either to support their allies, or to avenge 
 
 Chabas, who quotes the inscription, ‘ Voyage 
 
 dun F-gyptien,’ p- 194, refers, of course by 
 oversight, to Amenophis I. It is a point of 
 much importance in this inquiry to have this 
 intimation of the transport of troops to Phoenicia 
 by water. It is more than probable that the 
 Egyptians had a considerable navy under the 
 vigorous administration of the early kings of 
 this dynasty. We bave, in fact, the representa- 
 tion of the transport of chariots and horses on 
 ships in the tomb of Ahmes at El Kab, which 
 belongs to this very period. See Rosellini, 
 M. C., pl. cx., and Duemichen, ‘Fleet of an 
 Egyptian Queen,’ taf. xxviil. 5. 
 
460 
 
 their fall before Joshua. The mention of the 
 ship of war has a special interest. It is 
 obvious that, as the Pharaohs were the undis- 
 puted masters of the sea after the conquest of 
 Phoenicia under ‘Thotmes III., the most ready 
 and effectual way of transporting their troops 
 would be by ships. We have not sufficient 
 data to prove that they did adopt this mode 
 of carrying on their communications, but 
 there are other indications which make it 
 extremely probable. ‘The word used in the 
 inscriptions which record invasions of Asia 
 under Amenophis III. is specially if not ex- 
 clusively used of naval expeditions. (See 
 note 82.) It has been shown _ very 
 lately by a contemporary inscription that 
 at a far earlier period, under the sixth 
 dynasty, the Pharaoh Pepi sent large forces 
 by sea against the Herusha, probably Asi- 
 atics. See De Rougé, ‘ Recherches,’ p. 126. 
 The rapid march of an Egyptian army along 
 the coast of Palestine some seven or eight 
 years after the passage over the Jordan would 
 not present any considerable difficulty, directed 
 as it was against the confederates of the Amo- 
 rites, but every semblance of a difficulty dis- 
 appears if the expedition was by sea. 
 
 Under ‘Thotmes IV. we have no notice of 
 Asiatic war. The tributes were probably 
 paid without any further attempt at resist- 
 ance during that reign, which, though un- 
 distinguished and probably short, does not 
 appear to have been a period of disturbance.*4 
 
 (21.) The reign of Amenophis III. was long 
 and prosperous. His supremacy in Syria and 
 Mesopotamia was uncontested; but though 
 the inscriptions speak of expeditions into the 
 Soudan, and of tributes brought from all 
 nations, there is no indication of Asiatic 
 warfare. It was a period of almost uninter- 
 rupted peace. There is no probability that the 
 struggles in Palestine would have attracted 
 the attention or called for the interposition 
 of a monarch engaged in magnificent works 
 which surpass in beauty and rival in extent 
 those which were completed under any suc- 
 ceeding dynasty. 
 
 There are, however, facts which may 
 perhaps justify a conjecture that the relations 
 between Egypt and the Israelites underwent 
 some modification in the interval after the 
 
 8 It is to be observed that the current of the 
 Riviera di Ponente runs along the Delta and 
 thence to the coast of Palestine or Syria, carrying 
 with it so much of the Nile mud as to fill up 
 the harbours. The sea voyage would be easy 
 and rapid. We find notice of the transport of 
 corn from Egypt to the land of the Kheta under 
 Merneptah. ‘ Histor. Ins.,’ iil. 24. 
 
 84 Some scholars hold that the Exodus took 
 place at the close of this reign. This theory is 
 supported by ingenious arguments, but is scarcely 
 reconcileable with the condition of Egypt at the 
 beginning of the next reign, nor does it present 
 the coincidences which are drawn from the reign 
 of Thotmes II, and his successors, 
 
 ON. THE BEARINGS OF EGYPTIAN. HistGra 
 
 occupation of Palestine which corresponds to 
 this period. In 1 Chron. iv. 17, we read that 
 Mered, of the tribe of Judah, founded two 
 families, one by an Egyptian wife Bithia, who 
 is called a daughter of Pharaoh. ‘This family 
 was settled at Eshtemoa, on the hilly district 
 of Judah, south of Hebron, now Isemna; the 
 ruins indicate the site of a considerable city. 
 The exact place of Ezra, the father of Mered, 
 in the genealogy is uncertain, but it belongs 
 apparently to the second generation from 
 Caleb. Now we have the fact that Ameno- 
 phis III. was married to a very remarkable 
 personage who was not of royal parentage 
 and not an Egyptian by creed. Under her in- 
 fluence Amenophis I V., her son (whose strongly 
 marked features have a Semitic, not to say 
 Jewish character),®° completely revolutionised 
 the religion of Egypt, more especially attack- 
 ing its most loathsome form, the phallus- 
 worship of Khem. The names of this princess, 
 Tei, and of her parents, luaa and ‘uaa, bear 
 a singularly near resemblance to that of 
 Mered’s wife.®® 
 
 (22.) However this may be, the few known 
 facts of Egyptian history from the accession 
 of Amenophis IV., or Khu-n-Aten (ze. Glory 
 of the Sunbeam), are readily adjusted to 
 the early annals of the Judges. For a 
 few years the ascendancy of Egypt in Meso- 
 potamia was unimpaired. ‘The Rutens and 
 their allies were kept in submission; no 
 indication of an occupation of Palestine by 
 Egypt or its opponents is to be found: then 
 comes a time of internal struggle and confu- 
 sion, during which all the Asiatics threw off 
 the yoke. We have here a place for the inva- 
 sion of Cushan Rishathaim, the King of Meso- 
 potamia; which must have taken place about 
 a century after the death of Joshua. The 
 
 85 The most striking portraits of this king 
 are in Prisse, ‘Monuments,’ pl. x., and in the 
 ‘Denkmaler III. ;’ all the portraits have the 
 strongest character of individuality, wild, dreamy, 
 fanatic, with features in some points unlike those 
 of his predecessors, and approaching closely to 
 the Hebrew type. Ewald recognises and attaches 
 much importance to the traces of an attempt to 
 introduce a more spiritual form of religion at 
 this period: see ‘ Geschichte,’ v. I. i., p. 51, 
 note, 2nd edition. 
 
 86 In Egyptian, IN q 4 , The name 
 Bithia, exactly transcribed, would be f j RY . 
 
 The name of the father of Tei, qf eX : 
 
 Tua, is markedly Jewish. See the inscription in 
 Brugsch, ‘ Geographische Inscriften,’ i., taf. ix., 
 No. 333. In a work lately published (1868), 
 ‘The Fleet of an Egyptian Queen,’ M. Due- 
 michen points out the resemblance and apparent 
 connection between Aten and ]})IN, Lord, ob- 
 serving that the hieroglyphic group is certainly 
 used with reference to this Semitic name of God, 
 See explanation of pl. iii. 
 
QGRON CHE PUNTATEUCH: 
 
 growth of the power of the Moabites, and of 
 the nomads bearing the general denomina- 
 tion of Shasous in Egyptian, of Amalek, Edom, 
 Ammon, &c., in Hebrew, was a natural result 
 of the expulsion of the Mesopotamians on the 
 one side, and the prostration of Egypt on the 
 other.87 In the mean time the Cheta were gra- 
 dually acquiring the ascendancy from Cilicia 
 to the Euphrates,®* occupying the strongholds 
 in Syria, and encroaching gradually on the 
 borders of Palestine, a position which, not- 
 withstanding repeated and triumphant inva- 
 sions of their own territory, they occupied 
 during the whole period of the nineteenth 
 and apparently also the twentieth dynasties, 
 
 The duration assigned by M. Brugsch to 
 the eighteenth dynasty from the decease of 
 Thotmes III, is about 100 years. ‘The cor- 
 responding period, on the hypothesis we 
 are now considering, brings us near to the 
 occupation of Palestine by Eglon King of 
 Moab. It will be observed that, although the 
 results of comparison of Egyptian and Hebrew 
 annals are,and must be to a great extent con- 
 jectural, inasmuch as no direct or distinct 
 notice of the events preceding the Exodus 
 or following the occupation of Palestine by 
 the Israelites is found on Egyptian monu- 
 ments, and no notice of Egyptian history 
 occurs in the books of Joshua, Judges, and 
 Samuel, yet the conjectures rest on data 
 established beyond all contradiction. They 
 do not profess to do more than show that the 
 two series of events dovetail, and mutually 
 sustain and explain each other: the coinci- 
 dences, whether they be held complete and 
 convincing or not, are unsought; they forced 
 themselves on the writer’s attention, and gra- 
 dually led him to give a decided preference to 
 the hypothesis which has been here defended, 
 over that which is at present generally sup- 
 ported by Egyptian scholars. 
 
 (23.) We have now to consider what argu- 
 ments favourable or unfavourable to this hypo- 
 thesis are drawn from Manetho and other docu- 
 ments known to us through the medium of 
 Greek. Here we must carefully distinguish 
 between facts borne out by contemporary 
 monuments, and statements which, whether 
 correctly or incorrectly represented by the 
 translators and epitomizers, are contradicted 
 or not corroborated by such authority. 
 
 The Exodus is assumed by all ancient 
 chronologers, who derived their information 
 from Egyptian sources, to have taken place 
 under the eighteenth dynasty.** Josephus, 
 
 87 It is also to be remarked that the Rutens, or 
 Assyrians, were so weakened towards the end of 
 the eighteenth dynasty that they lost the ascen- 
 dancy ; a fact sufficiently explained by the over- 
 throw of Cushan Risliathaim. 
 
 88 See Brugsch, ‘H. E.,’ p. 127, and M, 
 Chabas, ‘ Voyage,’ p. 325. 
 
 89 All the passages are collected in the first 
 volume of Bunsen’s ‘ Egypt.’ 
 
 461 
 
 who regards the expulsion of the Hyksos to 
 be but a confused tradition of the departure 
 of the Israelites, places it under the first 
 king whom he calls Tethmosis; Africanus, 
 who follows Ptolemy the Mendesian, under 
 Amos, ie. Amosis, or Aahmes. Eusebius 
 brings the transaction lower down, but still 
 long before the nineteenth dynasty, viz. under 
 Achencherses or Achencheres, i.e. probably 
 Khunaten, the son of Amenophis III. This 
 opinion is said by Syncellus to be avowedly 
 in contradiction to all other authorities. 
 Eusebius was probably led to it by the evident 
 indications of great disturbances under that 
 reign, and by the tradition that emigrations 
 of considerable extent took place soon after- 
 wards.” 
 
 Passing to Manetho’s own statements, we 
 find that he represents the kings of the 
 Thebaid and of Upper Egypt as engaged in 
 a great and long-continued warfare with the 
 Hyksos: he asserts that the king, Misphrag- 
 muthosis, drove them out of all the other 
 districts in Egypt, and confined them within 
 the vast enclosure of Avaris. His son Teth- 
 mosis besieged the city with an immense army, 
 and, being unable to capture it, made a treaty 
 with them, permitting their departure: they 
 are said to have gone forth with their furni- 
 ture and their cattle, forming a host not less 
 than 240,000 in number, then to have tra- 
 versed the desert between Egypt and Syria, 
 and at last, fearing the Assyrians, at that time 
 masters of Asia, to have settled in Judza, 
 where they built the city of Jerusalem. 
 
 Setting the account which has been given 
 in these pages side by side with the statement 
 of Manetho, we see at once the character of 
 his history, and the corroboration which it 
 supplies to what has been advanced. 
 
 (1) A war of considerable duration was car- 
 ried on between the kings of Upper Egypt 
 and the Shepherds. Here Manetho and 
 the monuments agree. (2) The king whom 
 Manetho calls Misphragmuthosis achieved 
 great successes in war, but did not capture 
 Avaris. It is true that the Shepherds were 
 attacked by the first king of the dynasty, but 
 untrue that Avaris was not captured by him. 
 Here we have a partial agreement, but the name 
 of the king is not correct. (3) Certain enemies 
 of the Egyptians were in possession of a 
 limited district under his successor. The 
 monuments are silent, but from the Penta- 
 teuch we know that the Israelites occupied 
 Goshen at this time, as nearly all Egyptian 
 scholars agree. (4) These enemies left Egypt 
 by permission, traversed Syria, and occupied 
 Palestine. Their forces amounted to 240,000. 
 The monuments are silent. We have the 
 Scriptural account with scarcely a variation. 
 
 9 Viz. the expulsion of Danaus and his settle- 
 ment at Argos. See the statement of Diodorus, 
 
 p. 462. 
 
462 
 
 The principal inference bearing on our 
 present subject is that all these notices refer 
 to the same period, viz. the early years of the 
 eighteenth dynasty. 
 
 In another work Manetho gives what may 
 have been in his time the Egyptian account 
 of the Exodus: it is utterly worthless, and, as 
 nearly all critics have observed, was evidently 
 invented by a person who had the Scripture 
 narrative before him.’ It represents the 
 Israelites as lepers, and identifies Moses with 
 Osarsiph,®” a priest of Heliopolis, evidently 
 Joseph. ‘The Egyptian king, in whose reign the 
 enemies first made themselves masters of all 
 Egypt, committing atrocities far beyond those 
 attributed to the Hyksos, is called Amenophis. 
 According to this strange figment, Amenophis 
 committed his son Sethos, called also Rhamses, 
 to the charge of some private individual, and 
 retired into Ethiopia, whence he returned 
 with a great army, and finally ejected the 
 lepers and their allies the Shepherds from 
 Egypt, pursuing them unto the borders of 
 Syria. 
 
 All names and events are here in hopeless 
 confusion: but each name and each event is 
 found, though under very different circum- 
 stances, either in Egyptian or in sacred history. 
 Osarsiph and Moses, the character of the 
 Mosaic law, the prevalence of leprosy, the 
 connection of Osarsiph with Heliopolis, are 
 taken from Scripture; the names of Avaris, 
 Amenophis, Sethos, Rhamses, from Egyptian 
 monuments. ‘The expulsion of the Shepherds 
 by an Egyptian king with forces brought 
 from Ethiopia is, as we have seen, historical. 
 Amenophis himself, the son of Amosis, made 
 an expedition into Ethiopia. ‘There was a 
 religious aspect of the struggle between the 
 Shepherds and the Egyptians. No inference 
 of any value can be drawn from the whole 
 narrative in favour of either hypothesis now 
 under consideration. On the one side the 
 names of Sethos and Rameses would point to 
 the nineteenth dynasty, but it is scarcely con- 
 ceivable that a man having the least acquaint- 
 ance with Egyptian history should have 
 confounded Sethos and his son, or have re- 
 presented Amenophis as the father of Sesostris. 
 On the other side, the name of Amenophis 
 would point distinctly to the eighteenth 
 dynasty, and the whole narrative might get 
 into the shape which it here assumies, if the 
 facts above proved, and the combinations 
 which we have assumed, had been manipulated 
 by an Egyptian priest under the Ptolemies. 
 
 The story told by Cheremon (see Jose- 
 phus c. Apion, i. 32) is a modification of this. 
 The Israelites are led by Moses and Joseph, 
 
 91 See Browne, ‘ Ordo Szclorum,’ p. 581. 
 
 82 There is an evident reference to one or 
 both of Joseph’s names. The last syllable, 
 Siph, answers to seph, and also to Zaf, food. 
 Osir means rich, powerful, &c. ; Osersiph, rich 
 in food. 
 
 ON THE BEARINGS OF EGYPTIAN HISTORY 
 
 whose Egyptian names are said to be Tisithen 
 and Peteseph.* ‘They join an army of 300,000 
 men, whom Amenophis had left at Pelusium, 
 because he did not wish to bring them into 
 Egypt. Amenophis retreated into Ethiopia, 
 where he had a son named Mepenes, who, 
 when he became a man, drove the Jews into 
 Syria, and recalled his father Amenophis from 
 Ethiopia. 
 
 An extract from Lysimachus, given also by 
 Josephus, is a mere corruption of the Scriptural 
 narrative, invented under the Ptolemies. It 
 names Bocchoris (B.C. 721) as the Pharaoh 
 of the Exodus: a striking instance of con- 
 temptuous disregard of all historical proba- 
 bilities. 
 
 Diodorus has two accounts: in one (c. 
 xxxlv. 1) the adherents of Antiochus Sidetes 
 represent the Jews as a despicable race ex- 
 pelled from Egypt, hateful to the gods on 
 account of foul cutaneous diseases; in the 
 other (c. xl. 1) he relates that in ancient 
 times a pestilence which raged in Egypt was 
 ascribed to the wrath of the gods on account 
 of the multitude of aliens who with their 
 strange worship were offensive to the gods of 
 the land. The aliens were therefore expelled. 
 The most distinguished among them betook 
 themselves to Greece and other adjoining 
 regions, among whom were Danaus and Cad- 
 mus. ‘The main body, however, retired into 
 the country afterwards called Judea, which 
 at that time was a desert. This colony was 
 led by Moses. 
 
 From what source Diodorus derived this 
 latter statement is quite uncertain, but the 
 colouring is Egyptian. It undoubtedly points 
 to an earlier period than the nineteenth dynasty ; 
 most probably to that assigned by Eusebius to 
 the emigration into Palestine and Greece, viz. 
 the latter reigns of the eighteenth dynasty. 
 
 As a general result from this part of our 
 inquiry, we find that, with two exceptions, 
 all the names and transactions noticed by 
 Manetho, and by Greek writers, whether 
 heathen or Christian, harmonise with the 
 course of events under the eighteenth dynasty. 
 One exception is simply noticeable for its 
 absurdity, bringing the Exodus down to the 
 eighth century and the twenty-fourth dynasty : 
 the other is more important since it intro- 
 duces the names of Sethos and Rameses, but 
 under circumstances and in a relationship 
 which evince either an entire ignorance or 
 a wilful perversion of the best known facts 
 of Egyptian history. 
 
 One argument remains of which the im- 
 portance will not be questioned. Critics of 
 the most opposite schools who have carefully 
 
 93 Seph, the last syllable of Joseph’s Hebrew, 
 and the first of his Egyptian name, seems to 
 have left a permanent impression, and that a very 
 natural one, as meaning ‘‘ food.” See Essay 
 II. 
 
 %{ See Browne, ‘Ordo Seclorum,’ p. 584. 
 
UPON TRE PENTATEUCH, 
 
 considered the bearings of the facts drawn 
 from Egyptian sources upon the narrative of 
 Exodus, concur in the conclusion that the ac- 
 cession of the eighteenth dynasty was the be- 
 ginning of the persecution, and that the Exodus 
 took place in some reign before the acces- 
 sion of the nineteenth. ‘Thus Knobel, Winer, 
 and Ewald. 
 
 (24.) We have now to consider whether the 
 facts, admitted by all Egyptologers and attested 
 by monuments and other documents of un- 
 questionable authority, which appertain to 
 the history of the 19th dynasty, accord with 
 the hypothesis here adopted, or whether we 
 should acquiesce in the conclusion to which 
 eminent scholars have been led;°* that 
 which identifies Rameses II. with the first 
 persecutor of the Israelites, and places the 
 Exodus under his son Merneptah. It may be 
 well to say at once that the reader might 
 accept that conclusion without repugnance: 
 on certain conditions it may be reconciled 
 with the narrative of Exodus, which some at 
 least of its chief supporters accept as an 
 authentic document, if not as the production 
 of Moses. It is, however, a question to be 
 determined not by authority, but by circum- 
 stantial evidence. It is now universally ad- 
 mitted that no monuments of this or of any 
 other period make mention of the events 
 which preceded or immediately followed the 
 departure of the Israelites. In the following 
 pages every fact bearing upon this question 
 will be fairly and fully stated, together with 
 the arguments on both sides. 
 
 (25.) We have first to inquire into the known 
 or probable condition of Palestine during the 
 interval between the early Judges and the time 
 of Deborah and Barak. It is an interval of 
 considerable duration, extending over some 
 two centuries, if we take the numbers in 
 the book of Judges literally, *’ and covering 
 
 9% M. de Rougé says in his ‘ Report on 
 Egyptian Studies,’ 1867, p. 27, ‘‘ Les rapports 
 de temps et de noms ont fait penser a M. de 
 Rougé que Ramesés II. devait étre considéré 
 également comme le Pharaon sous lequel Moise 
 
 dut fuir Egypte et dont le trés-long régne forcga 
 le législateur futur des Heébreux a un trés-long 
 exil. A défaut d’un texte précis qui manque 
 dans la Bible, cette conjecture rend bien compte 
 des faits, et elle a été généralement adoptee.” 
 It has in fact been adopted by Egyptian scholars 
 in Germany, France, and England. The sobriety 
 and reserve with which M. de Rougé states this 
 conjecture, to which he attaches great value, 
 stand out in strong contrast to the confidence 
 with which it is maintained as a proved fact by 
 most of his followers. 
 
 98 See the statement of M. de Rougé quoted 
 above, note 67. 
 
 97 The numbers in Judges iii. are a long but 
 uncertain time from the conquest under Joshua, 
 x, Cushan Rishathaim, 8 years; peace, 40 years ; 
 Eglon, 18 years; rest, 80 years ; Philistines, x ; 
 ze. 146+ 4+. Brugsch calculates the in- 
 
 463 
 
 certainly as much time as is occupied by the 
 annals of Egypt between Amenophis III. and 
 the later kings of the nineteenth dynasty. 
 
 During the whole of that period it is dis- 
 tinctly stated that the Israelites were not in 
 exclusive possession of Palestine; they dwelt 
 among the Canaanites, Hittites, and Amorites, 
 and Perizzites, and Hivites, and Jebusites. 
 ( Judges iii. 5.) Many of the most important 
 strongholds were occupied by these nations, 
 including nearly all those which are men- 
 tioned in the records of Seti and Rameses II.” 
 Generally speaking, the open country was re= 
 tained by the Amorites, against whose iron 
 chariotry the Israelites could not make head 
 even in Judah (Judges i. 19). The whole 
 district from the southern frontier upward 
 belonged to them, and was apparently called, 
 as we find it even in inscriptions of the 
 twentieth dynasty, the land of the Amorites.” 
 This was the case even when the land was 
 at rest: in some portions of Palestine the 
 Israelites brought the inhabitants into partial 
 subjection and made them tributaries, but the 
 process was slow, alternating with many dis- 
 asters, and not completed until a very late 
 period, long after that which is now under 
 consideration. When the Israelites were 
 themselves brought under subjection the 
 whole country was in a state described 
 incidentally in the song of Deborah: the 
 highways were unoccupied, the villages 
 ceased, there was war in the gates, ze. the 
 strongholds were blockaded; while not a 
 spear or shield was to be seen among 40,000 
 in Israel (Judges v. 6). 
 
 It is clear therefore that an Egyptian army 
 traversing Palestine at any part of this time 
 would not encounter Israelitish forces in the 
 open field: Israel had no chariotry, no horses, 
 and would not be concerned with expeditions 
 which were invariably directed against its 
 own enemies in Syria.’ 
 
 We have now to remark the very exact 
 correspondence between the Hebrew and 
 
 terval between Amenophis III. and Merneptah 
 at 200 years. The elements of uncertainty on 
 both sides are considerable, but the general 
 correspondence is noteworthy. 
 
 % #.¢., Jerusalem, Bethshean, Taanach, 
 Dor, Megiddo, Zidon, Bethshemesh, Bethanath. 
 Gaza and the other four cities in the district 
 were evidently recovered during this period by 
 the Philistines. Compare Judges i. 18 with ii. 
 3 and 31. In the inscriptions of the nineteenth 
 dynasty, I cannot find any Palestinian city, which 
 the book of Judges represents as occupied by 
 Israelites in the period after the conquest. — 
 
 99 See ¢g. Duemichen, ‘Hist. Inschriften,’ 
 pl. xxviii., xxix. ; 
 
 100 The strongholds which the Egyptians, 
 under Seti and Rameses II., had occasion to 
 attack, and some of which they appear to have 
 garrisoned, were, with scarcely an exception, in 
 the possession of Canaanites or Hittites. See 
 note 98. 
 
464 
 
 Egyptian notices of the power predominant 
 in Western Asia. 
 
 The Assyrians, called Rutens by the Egypt- 
 ians, were masters of the north of Syria, and 
 of all the countries extending from Cilicia to 
 Mesopotamia, when that district was invaded 
 by the early kings of the eighteenth dynasty. 
 ‘Their influence in the confederacy opposed to 
 Egypt was gradually superseded. Up to the 
 time when Seti I. invaded Syria, i.e. according 
 to our computation about 150 years after the 
 Exodus, they were the leaders of the con- 
 federacy, which was then broken, dispersed, 
 and for a season crushed by repeated defeats. 
 M. Chabas observes (p. 328) that under 
 Rameses II. they disappear altogether, they 
 are not even mentioned in the great campaign 
 of his 5th year. Their name is found ona 
 small number of monuments belonging to 
 later reigns, but there is no indication that 
 they had recovered their former importance. 
 
 In accordance with this we find that their 
 last appearance in Palestine was soon after 
 its occupation by the Israelites, when Cushan 
 Rishathaim was finally expelled by Othniel the 
 nephew of Caleb. 
 
 Nothing more probable than that such 
 an event should have occurred under the 
 eighteenth dynasty (see above, p. 460); its 
 occurrence at the late period which the ac- 
 ceptance of the other chronological system 
 would involve is inconceivable. 
 
 In place of the Rutens or Assyrians we find 
 the Cheta in possession of Syria at the acces- 
 sion of Seti I. The identification of this people 
 with the Hittites of Scripture has been ques- 
 tioned, chiefly on philological grounds,!” by 
 M. Chabas; but is still generally admitted 
 by Egyptian scholars, and appears to rest on 
 very sufficient evidence. It is certain that the 
 Hittites, Canaanites, Zidonians, and Amorites, 
 formed part of the confederacy opposed to 
 Seti and Rameses II. We learn from the 
 book of Judges (i. 26) that the country 
 north of Palestine was called the land of the 
 Hittites, that Phoenicia retained its inde- 
 pendence, and further, that at the close of the 
 period the whole country was in subjection 
 to Jabin King of Canaan, the captain of 
 whose host was “Sisera,! which dwelt in 
 Harosheth of the Gentiles.” 
 
 Taking now the contemporary history of 
 Egypt derived exclusively from public inscrip- 
 tions, we have the following coincidences :— 
 
 (26.) In the first year of his reign Seti 
 
 101 For proofs see M. Brugsch, ‘H. E. and G.,’ 
 and the dissertation by M. Chabas, ‘ Voyage 
 d’un Egyptien,’ p. 318-332. 
 
 102 Ze, from the comparison of Chetan names 
 (of which seventeen are preserved in the treaty 
 between Rameses IJ. and Khetasar) with the 
 names of Hittites found in the Bible. 
 
 103 The name is evidently Chetax ; it has the 
 most marked characteristic of the names collected 
 by M. Chabas (see note 74), viz. the termination 
 Sera or Sar; see further on, 
 
 ON THE- BEARINGS: OF EGYPTIAN Histone 
 
 marched against the Shasous, who at that time 
 
 occupied, or were masters of, the countries - 
 
 from Pithom to Pakanana. He defeated 
 them with great slaughter, and advanced into 
 Mesopotamia. On a second invasion he again 
 traversed the territory occupied by the Shasous 
 and took several forts. 
 
 ‘The word Shasous, as we have before seen, 
 was a general denomination for the warlike 
 tribes who at various times overran Palestine. 
 About the time which the synchronism of 
 Egyptian and Hebrew history, on our hy- 
 pothesis, assigns to Seti and the Israelites, we 
 find Eglon King of Moab in combination 
 with the children of Ammon and Amalek, 
 master of the country. At any time within 
 the period, as we have also observed, the 
 opponents whom the Pharaohs would en- 
 counter in Palestine would come under the 
 same general designation. 
 
 The fortresses named in the inscriptions 
 which refer to this campaign were one and 
 all occupied by the enemies of Israel. 
 
 The Shasous conquered by Seti were in 
 alliance with the Syrians and the Rutens: 
 both mentioned as foes or oppressors of the 
 Israelites. 
 
 The great object of Seti and his successor 
 was to conquer Syria, and to occupy its 
 principal city called Kadesh, which is probably 
 identified by Egyptologers with Edessa, or 
 Ems, on the Orontes. 
 
 At the close of this reign Egypt was domi- 
 nant in Syria, and held some fortresses, but 
 the power of the Cheta was unbroken, and 
 we have no traces whatever of a permanent 
 occupation of Palestine. As in the time of 
 Shamgar, the Israelites were in the state de- 
 scribed as that of Seti’s foes in the inscriptions, 
 either hidden in caves or entrenched in inac- 
 cessible strongholds. ‘The principal effect of 
 the invasion, so far as the Hebrews were 
 concerned, would be a diminution in the 
 power and resources of their foes. 
 
 The transactions in the reign of Rameses II. 
 will require very special attention. We shall 
 best arrive at a conclusion by considering each 
 point in detail which may tell for or against 
 either hypothesis. 
 
 (27.) Rameses Merammon, the Sesostris‘ of 
 
 104 Tt is questioned whether this means a fort 
 in Syria or Canaan. 
 
 105 See Brugsch, ‘Recueil I.,’ pl. xlv. e: 
 ‘‘throwing away their bows they fled to caves 
 in terror from his majesty.” The word ‘‘caves”’ 
 
 : Gj 
 x —_ 
 here is Hebrew, she ao & i | { Im 5 
 
 magaratha = NV Wa. : 
 
 106 This is generally held, but is not certain. 
 Dr. G. Ebers doubts whether Herodotus does 
 not refer the name to Seti I., and suggests that 
 the hieroglyphic group may perhaps be read 
 Sesetres, or Sesetresu, which comes very near 
 Sesostris. See ‘Egypten und die Biicher 
 Moses,’ i. p. 79. 1868, 
 
 eS 
 
UPON GEE: PENTATEUCH,. * 
 
 the Greeks, succeeded Seti I. It was supposed 
 until very lately that he was very young, a 
 mere lad, on his accession ; but the researches 
 of M, Mariette!” have brought to light the 
 curious and interesting fact that he had been 
 associated with his father from infancy in the 
 royal dignity, and that he had been admitted 
 to the full prerogatives of a Pharaoh long 
 before the death of Seti: in the first year after 
 that event he is represented as surrounded 
 with a family of twenty-seven princes and as 
 many princesses. This is important in its 
 bearings on Egyptian chronology. There is 
 no doubt that he reigned full sixty-seven years, 
 a date found lately on a monument at Tanis, 
 but from what epoch the year is dated re- 
 mains uncertain; probably from an epoch 
 long anterior to his father’s decease. ‘The 
 argument is of still more importance in its 
 bearing upon another biblical question. Of 
 no king in the whole series of Pharaohs could 
 it be asserted, in such direct contradiction of 
 well-known facts, that he was a new hing, 
 rising up over Egypt: of none can it be proved 
 more certainly that he did not at once make 
 an entire change in the policy of this kingdom. 
 ‘The argument upon which much stress is 
 laid, viz. that his lengthened reign accords 
 with the notices in Exodus, falls with the 
 assumption that he outlived his father some 
 sixty-seven years. 
 
 107 ¢ Fouilles exécutées en Egypte, en Nubie, et 
 au Soudan, d’apres les ordres de S. A. le Viceroi 
 d’Egypte, par Auguste Mariette Bey.’ Paris, 1867. 
 The second volume, in two parts, contains text 
 and plates ; the first volume is not yet published. 
 The most important inscription, from the temple 
 at Abydos, has been carefully analysed by M. 
 Maspero, 1867. It belongs to the first year of 
 the sole reign of Rameses II., who is represented 
 as associated from his infancy with his father, and 
 formally crowned while yet a boy. Compare 
 Maspero, p. 29, with Mariette, p. 15. Mariette’s 
 ‘work throws an unexpected and curious light on 
 the character of Rameses, and on the state of 
 Egyptian art towards the end of his reign. In 
 the earlier inscriptions Rameses expresses the 
 highest veneration and gratitude to his father ; in 
 the latter he effaces the name of Seti, and sub- 
 stitutes hisown. The earlier portions of the build- 
 ing and inscriptions are remarkable for beauty 
 and breadth of style ; the later sculptures are in- 
 correct, and the style detestable. See ‘ Fouilles,’ 
 especially p. 99. Since this note was printed, 
 M. Mariette has withdrawn the volume here 
 quoted from circulation, and substituted another, 
 in which much valuable matter is suppressed. 
 
 108 This materially affects the argument to 
 which M. de Rougé has always attached special 
 importance (see above, note 95). Moses could not 
 hhave been born until some years after the be- 
 ginning of the persecution, z.¢., according to M. 
 de Rougé, Brugsch, and others, after the Syrian 
 campaign; when Rameses is now proved to have 
 been at least in the maturity of middle life. We 
 thus lose the space of eighty years required by 
 the Biblical narrative before the Exodus, 
 
 Vou, I, ‘ 
 
 465 
 
 In the 5th year of his sole reign Rameses 
 invaded Syria. In the neighbourhood of 
 Kadesh, on the Orontes, he defeated the con- 
 federates, who as usual had revolted when 
 their conqueror died. The battle would almost 
 seem to be the only one in which the king 
 distinguished himself; it is described on 
 numerous monuments, and forms the subject 
 of what is called the epic poem of Pentaour.'” 
 The campaign was successful: one of the 
 most important results for this inquiry was 
 the capture, and perhaps the occupation, of 
 some fortresses in Palestine. We have the 
 name of Sharem, or Shalem; it is doubtful 
 whether this is to be identified with Jeru- 
 salem; if so, it was, as we know, long after 
 the conquest, in possession of the Jebusites; 
 Maram and Dapur, in the land of the Amorites, 
 are also mentioned; Bethanath, still occupied 
 by Canaanites (see Judges i. 33); and lastly 
 Askelon. The notices of Askelon in Judges 
 show that it was taken at first by the Israelites 
 (i. 18), and imply probably that it came 
 again into the occupation of the Philistines 
 some time later, perhaps in the time of Shamgar. 
 See Judges iii. 31. ; 
 
 So far the argument remains stationary. 
 The condition of Palestine under Rameses 
 continues as under Seti, quite in agreement 
 with that which we find in the 3rd chapter of 
 Judges; Egypt commanding the high roads, 
 occupying .some fortresses taken principally 
 from the Canaanites, but concentrating its 
 forces and developing all its energies in its 
 attempt to retain supremacy in Syria. We 
 should of course expect to find among the 
 numerous prisoners of war brought back by 
 Rameses some Israelites, if, as we have 
 assumed, they were then dwelling, though 
 not dominant, in the land. 
 
 (28.) It was after the king’s return to Egypt 
 that the events occurred upon which the hypo- 
 thesis rests that he reduced the Israelites of 
 Goshen to bondage. Diodorus relates that he 
 constructed a line of fortifications from Pelu- 
 sium to Heliopolis. It is, however, proved by 
 the monuments that such a line existed under 
 the ancient empire, and that it had been en- 
 larged and strengthened by his father Seti. 
 It is also known that in the latter years of his 
 reign Rameses effaced his father’s name and 
 substituted his own on many of the principal 
 constructions of Egypt ;"° still there can be 
 no reasonable doubt that he employed vast 
 numbers of captives in the fortresses which 
 
 109 This curious and important document was 
 first explained and afterwards translated by M. de 
 
 ‘Rougé, M. Chabas, and Mr. Goodwin. The trans- 
 
 lation in Brugsch, ‘Histoire d’ Egypte,’ Pp. 140, 
 is that of M. de Rougé. The original exists in a 
 hieratic papyrus, Sallier IIL, in the Select Papyri 
 
 _of the British Museum, and more or less complete 
 
 in hieroglyphic inscriptions at Karnak and Abu 
 Simbel. 
 
 10 “See tote 1, 
 ; GG 
 
466 
 
 he enlarged, or erected on the banks of the 
 great canal, now called the Wady Tumilat. 
 Among these fortresses two are mentioned 
 specially, the fort of Zaru and Pe-Ramesses. 
 These are assumed by Brugsch to be the 
 Pithom and Rameses of Exodus. ‘The 
 question is fully discussed in another part 
 of this work. Here it is enough to ob- 
 serve that these two cities or forts existed 
 GAGE That which Brugsch calls Pithom, 
 
 ut of which the true name in Egyptian is 
 Pa-Chetem en Zalou, was at least as old as 
 the time of Thotmes III. Pithom itself, the 
 Pa-Tum of the inscriptions, the IIdrovpos of 
 Herodotus, may have been, and probably was, 
 in its immediate neighbourhood, but it is 
 nowhere mentioned in connexion with Ra- 
 meses. The case is much stronger for the 
 other city." Pa-Ramessou, or A-Ramessou, 
 i.c. the residence of Rameses, was undoubtedly 
 enlarged by this king: it was a city of the 
 highest importance, the capital of a rich 
 district, the residence of the sovereign, where 
 he received foreign embassies, reviewed his 
 troops, and held a magnificent court. Still 
 it is proved by contemporary documents that 
 it was not founded by Rameses. In the fifth 
 year of his reign, before the great works for 
 the defence of the frontier were constructed, 
 Rameses received the ambassadors of the 
 Cheta in this city, which, according to M. 
 Brugsch, is mentioned by name in the reign 
 of Seti.” 
 
 Considering, however, the great importance 
 of this citadel, to which additions were made 
 continually under this reign, we should expect 
 that a large number of captives would be 
 employed in the works, and among the captives 
 brought into Egypt at the end of the Syrian 
 campaign Israelites would naturally be looked 
 for. Although it was the usual policy of 
 Rameses to employ prisoners in the parts 
 of his dominions most remote from their own 
 country, there were obvious reasons why this 
 system should be departed from in their case : 
 there was a grim irony, quite in keeping with 
 Egyptian character, in reducing Israelites to 
 
 1! The identity of this city with Rameses is the 
 main, in fact the only substantial argument for 
 making Moses the contemporary of Rameses II. 
 Even were it admitted that the name, in the 
 exact form which it takes in Exodus, was first 
 given by Rameses, the argument, though strong, 
 would not be conclusive, for all hold that the 
 names of places may have been altered at succes- 
 sive revisions of the Pentateuch, the new and 
 well-known name being substituted for the old, 
 when a modern editor would give a note. The 
 argument, moreover, has no weight at all when 
 urged by critics who suppose that the Pentateuch 
 was written after the Israelites were connected 
 with Egypt under Solomon, or later. In that 
 case the names of the district and city would of 
 course have been taken from actual usage. I 
 believe the truth.to be as stated in the text. 
 
 12 Brugsch, ‘H. E.,’ p. 154 
 
 ON THE BEARINGS OF EGYPTIAN. HISTORY 
 
 servitude on the scene of their forefathers’ 
 oppression; and their escape, difficult under 
 all circumstances, could be, and, as we shall 
 see, actually was, guarded against by measures 
 of peculiar stringency. 
 
 (29.) Now, that Israelites were actually em- 
 ployed then and there has been, though not 
 really proved, yet shown to be so probable 
 that nearly all Egyptian scholars accept it as 
 a fact. M. Chabas™® first called attention 
 to the circumstance that the Egyptian word 
 “‘ Aperu” corresponds very closely to “ He- 
 brews,” the name by which the Israelites were 
 perhaps best known to foreigners. The tran- 
 scription is not quite accurate: the letter “p” 
 is by no means the proper representation of the 
 Hebrew “b,” nor have I found any conclusive 
 example of a substitution ;"* but the general 
 acquiescence of Egyptologers may be regarded 
 as a sufficient ground for admitting the identifi- 
 cation. 
 
 Still the question remains whether these 
 Hebrews were in the condition described in 
 Exodus, inhabitants of the district in which 
 
 113 See ‘Melanges Egyptologiques,’ i. p. 42-54, 
 and ii., on Rameses and Pithom. 
 
 114 Aftera repeated examination of the Semitic 
 names transcribed on Egyptian documents, I 
 find no instance upon which full reliance can be 
 placed. Many names occur in which the B is 
 represented by the Egyptian homophones. The 
 Egyptian ‘‘p” represents the ‘‘ph” of the 
 Hebrews. Mr. Birch concurs in this statement. 
 
 The word — oe ew Aper, or Apher, 
 
 occurs in the annals of Thotmes III. twice in 
 an inscription at Karnak. See M. de Rouge, 
 ‘Album Photographique,’ pl. lii., and is tran- 
 scribed by M. de Rougé, NIBY- The exact and 
 proper transcription of the Aperu would be 
 py, not My. A still stronger objection, 
 which seems indeed insurmountable, is sug- 
 gested by one account of these Aperu. In the 
 inscription at Hamamat, under Rameses IV. (see 
 further on), they are called Aperu n napetu Anu, 
 z.e. Aperu of the Anu. The Anu are often men- 
 tioned as a warlike race in Nubia, who rebelled 
 frequently against the Pharaohs. They are here 
 written with a group which always represents 
 bowmen, whether auxiliaries or enemies. 
 
 SALE Se) 
 
 The inference is almost irresistible that these 
 Aperu, and, if these, the others also, were 
 Nubians, condemned to work in the quarries. 
 See Brugsch, ‘Geog. Inschriften,’ iii. p. 77 ; and 
 on the Anu, see the ‘ Excursus II.,’. article 
 Anamim. It seems after all doubtful whether 
 Aperu is a proper name, or simply denotes work- 
 men. Maspero says that they were, as one 
 knows, the servants of the temple. ‘Essai,’ p. 22. 
 Neither Birch nor Brugsch give this in their Dic- 
 tionaries, but the etymology points to such a 
 meaning, ‘‘ Aper, to supply or prepare,” and 
 Maspero is a good authority. Aperu is given as 
 a variant of Shennin, attendants in the Ritual, 
 c. Ixxviii, 37. 
 
UPON THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 they were employed, or prisoners of war. The 
 former alternative is generally assumed: a 
 close examination of the original documents 
 seems decidedly to point to the latter. 
 
 Four Egyptian documents give an account 
 of these Aperu. Two belong to the reign 
 of Rameses II. ‘They are official documents 
 of very peculiar interest. One of them was 
 written by a certain Kawisar, an officer of 
 the commissariat at Pa-Ramesson. He reports 
 that he has executed his orders, which were 
 to distribute corn to the soldiers and to the 
 Aperu, or Apuriu, who are employed in draw- 
 ing stones for the great Bekken (i.e. fortified 
 enclosure) of Pa-Ramesson: the corn was 
 delivered to a general of mercenary troops; 
 the distribution was made monthly. In another 
 report (which however does not mention the 
 Aperu) he speaks of large supplies of fish for 
 the city. 
 
 The obvious inference from this account 
 would seem to be that persons employed in 
 such labours, fed by rations, and under military 
 superintendence, were captives, and not in- 
 habitants of the district."° The name “ Ka- 
 wisar ” resembles the well-known names of 
 Cheta: Chetan officers are found in the 
 service of Rameses, and such a man was 
 peculiarly qualified for the office, both as a 
 natural enemy of the Hebrews and as familiar 
 with their language."® 
 
 The second document has special claims to 
 attention, since M. Chabas has shown that it 
 is probably the original report addressed by a 
 scribe Keniamen to an officer of high rank, 
 the Kazana, or General Hui,’ of the house- 
 hold of Rameses. It proves that strict in- 
 junctions were given to provide food for the 
 officers of the garrison and also for the 
 “« Aperu” who drew stones for the Pharaoh 
 
 15 This inference is in fact the first which 
 would suggest itself to a scholar looking at any 
 of these documents. M. Brugsch observes (in 
 the third part of his great work on Egyptian 
 Geography, published in 1860, see p. 77), ‘*This 
 name, as the determinative shows, evidently 
 belonged to a foreign people, who had been 
 taken prisoners in the Egyptian campaigns, and 
 condemned to work in the quarries, a custom 
 noticed by all ancient writers on Egypt, and 
 especially with reference to Rameses II.” 
 
 6 In the ‘Mel. Egypt.’ M. Chabas assumes 
 that the name is Semitic. He has since taken 
 much pains (see ‘ Voy. E.’, pp. 326-330) to prove 
 that the Chetan names are altogether of a dif- 
 ferent origin. The argument stands good in the 
 form above proposed, whichever view is taken. 
 
 117 M, Chabas treats this asa proper name. M. 
 de Rouge shows that it is equivalent to })SP, and 
 means general of cavalry. See ‘Revue Archéo- 
 logique,’ Aoft, 1867. The name Hui is 
 Egyptian, and is found under the ancient em- 
 pire. This does not support Dr. Ebers’ state- 
 ment, that the cavalry was always under the 
 management of Semitics in this time. See 
 ‘ ZEgypten,’ &c., p. 229. 
 
 467 
 
 Rameses Merammon in a district south of 
 Memphis. 
 
 This is a strong corroboration of the con- 
 clusion that, if Israelites, they were prisoners 
 of war. The Israelites of the Exodus, from 
 first to last, are represented as forced to 
 labour in their own district under Egyptian 
 taskmasters, who were certainly not soldiers, 
 and with a complete national organization of 
 superintendents. 
 
 The other documents complete the argu- 
 ment. Aperu were employed in considerable 
 numbers in reigns which all admit to be 
 posterior to the Exodus. In a document of 
 great importance, of which M. Chabas gives 
 an account (see ‘ Voyage d’un Egyptien,’ p. 
 211), we find a body of 2083 Aperu residing 
 upon a domain of Rameses II1. under the 
 command of officers of rank called Marinas: 
 from the signs attached to these names it is 
 evident that they were not subjects but 
 captives.“* Here, again, the inference is 
 natural that they were brought by Rameses 
 II]. on his return from a campaign in Syria. 
 (See further on.) Another notice (see note 
 114) is found under Rameses IV.: 800 
 Aperu were employed in the quarries of 
 Hamamat, accompanied, as in all the cases 
 where they are mentioned, by an armed force, 
 generally a detachment of mercenaries. With 
 regard to the Aperu in both reigns, M. 
 Chabas supposes that they may have remained 
 after the Exodus as mercenaries. It may be 
 so; if so, the same explanation would apply 
 to the Aperu under Rameses II.; but it 
 scarcely agrees with the descriptions of their 
 condition, and it seems very improbable that 
 any considerable number of Israelites should 
 have wished or dared to stay, or that their 
 presence would have been tolerated by the 
 Egyptians at all for a long time after the 
 Exodus. 
 
 It is to be observed that in every case, far 
 from wishing to diminish the numbers of these 
 labourers, the Egyptian kings took great pains 
 for their maintenance; they were valuable as 
 slaves, not objects of suspicion as disaffected 
 and dangerous subjects. 
 
 (30.) Reverting now to the condition of West- 
 ern Asia, we find that during the latter years 
 of this reign the Cheta retained their position 
 as the dominant power in Syria. In the twenty- 
 first year of Rameses he made a formal treaty 
 
 118 In addition to the stake, which denotes 
 foreigners or slaves, they have for a determinative 
 ‘‘a leg ina trap.” This is used sometimes for 
 dwellers in general ; but the proper meaning, as 
 given by Birch (‘Dict. Hier.’), is ‘** entrap, 
 ravish, trample ;” and Ebers gives the same 
 meaning to the word which is used in this pas- 
 sage. 
 
 ris This curious documentis printed in Brugsch’s 
 ‘Recueil.’ It has been translated, first by 
 Brugsch, and lately by M. Chabas, * Voyage 
 d’un Egyptien.’ Among the terms is one, to 
 which both parties evidently attached great im- 
 
 GG 2 
 
468 
 
 -with Chetasar, their king; both parties treat- 
 ing on terms of equality and pledging them- 
 -selves to perpetual amity. The alliance was 
 confirmed by the marriage of Rameses with 
 the daughter of Chetasar. Between two great 
 powers thus evenly balanced Palestine might 
 be, and probably was, in a state of comparative 
 tranquillity for a period corresponding with 
 the uncertain interval between Eglon and 
 Shamgar At the close of that interval, which 
 -would cover the time of Rameses and extend 
 into the reign of Merneptah, the sacred history 
 represents the south of Palestine as occupied, 
 for the first time after the Exodus, by the 
 Philistines, and the north completely subju- 
 gated by Jabin King of Canaan. 
 
 (31.) Notices are found in papyri of this 
 period which give some notion of the state of 
 Palestine. ‘The most important is that which 
 
 .was first analysed by Mr. Goodwin, and 
 has since been translated and explained with 
 remarkable ingenuity and learning by M. 
 Chabas.”° It recites the adventures of an 
 officer of cavalry employed, as it would seem, 
 on a mission into Syria towards the end of 
 the reign of Rameses II. Whether the ad- 
 ventures are real, or, as M. de Rougé™ and 
 others maintain, the narrative is fictitious, 
 composed for the instruction of students pre- 
 paring for military service, may be uncertain, 
 but the notices, so far as they go, are valuable, 
 and were probably derived from persons who 
 had been engaged in the campaigns of Rameses. 
 A considerable number of names have been 
 identified, some with certainty, others with 
 ‘more or less of probability, with cities well 
 known from the Scriptural narrative. It is, 
 however, to be remarked, that of these a very 
 ‘small proportion, and those for the most part 
 very doubtful, belong to the interior of Pales- 
 tine: and that these lie almost exclusively on 
 the high-road, followed, as we have before 
 ‘seen, by the Egyptian armies. The traveller 
 is represented in the first part of the narrative 
 as proceeding at once to Syria,™ where the 
 transactions occur which occupy the greater 
 part of the story.“ That country was held 
 by the Cheta, but it was in a state of general 
 
 portance, viz. the mutual extradition of fugitives, 
 Stress is laid upon this as bearing upon the 
 narrative in Exodus, but with little cause: it 
 was a condition not likely to be omitted, under 
 any circumstances, between the owners of im- 
 mense numbers of slaves and the rulers of dis- 
 affected districts. 
 
 120 Under the attractive title, ‘Voyage d’un 
 Egyptien en Syrie, en Phénicie, en Palestine, 
 &c., au 14™¢ siecle avant notre ére.’ 1866. 
 
 121 See ‘Revue Archéologique,’ Aofit, 1867, 
 p- 100, note I. 
 
 12 This is noticed by M. Chabas, p. 96; it 
 accords with the view above stated, that the 
 communications between Egypt and Syria were 
 most commonly by sea. 
 
 _ #3 At least three sections, from p. 18 to p. 
 23° 
 
 ON THE.BEARINGS OF EGYPTIAN HISTORY 
 
 disorganisation, overrun by Shasous, and the 
 supremacy of Egypt was evidently recognised. 
 
 On his return the officer crossed the Jordan, 
 
 and touched apparently at some places in the 
 north of Palestine; this part of the journey 
 was beset by almost insurmountable difh- 
 culties: the country seems to have been almost 
 impassable to a charioteer; until he entered 
 Megiddo (which, as we before saw, was in 
 possession of the Canaanites in the time of the 
 early Judges) he had to encounter the Shasous, 
 from whom he escapes by a precipitate flight, 
 not without serious detriment to his person 
 and property. ‘The description reminds the 
 reader of all the notices in the book of Judges 
 which refer to periods when the Israelites 
 were driven to their fastnesses, or hiding in 
 caves, while the open country, or the passes, 
 were infested by robber hordes from the ad- 
 joining deserts. At Joppa, where the authority 
 of Egypt appears to be recognised, the journey 
 seems to come to an end. No mention is 
 made of Israelites in this papyrus, none indeed 
 was to be expected: ” the only designation for 
 the inhabitants with whom the officer came 
 into contact was Shasous—that which the 
 Egyptians gave to all the nomad and pastoral 
 tribes, probably including the Hebrews, who 
 occupied the countries between their frontiers 
 and Syria. 
 
 (32.) One point of great importance in re- 
 ference to this and the succeeding reigns, in 
 which the events recorded in Exodus are so 
 generally assumed to have occurred, remains to 
 be considered. The collection of papyri in the 
 British Museum, of which the principal have 
 been published by the trustees, belong for the 
 most part to this period. ‘They were written 
 either under Rameses Il. or his immediate 
 successors. ‘They indicate a very considerable 
 development of Egyptian literature. ‘The 
 writing is legible, and the composition in- 
 cludes a varied treatment of many distinct 
 subjects, giving a tolerably complete idea of 
 the social and political condition of the people, 
 especially of those employed in the district 
 adjoining Pa-Ramesson. It was quite natural 
 to expect that, if the Israelites were settled in 
 Goshen, or had been very lately expelled, 
 when those documents were written, some 
 notices of them would be found, some allu- 
 sions at least to the events preceding the 
 Exodus. Accordingly a writer,“ to whose 
 industry and ingenuity we are indebted for 
 some of the first attempts to decipher and 
 
 124 The places named in the first part of the 
 fourth section are in great confusion, and, though 
 evidently Palestinian, are not clearly identified. » 
 
 123 M, Chabas (‘ Voyage,’ p. 220) draws an 
 argument against the presence of Israelites from 
 the mention of camels as used for food ; but the 
 explanation of the passage is doubtful, and the 
 Shasous named in it were nomads of the desert, 
 who, as M. Chabas observes, ate camel’s flesh. 
 
 126 Mr, Dunbar Heath, ‘ Papyri of the Exodus,’ 
 
ULON THE PENTATEUCH 
 
 explain the select papyri, believed, and for a 
 time persuaded others, that he found abun- 
 dance of such notices. He speaks of a true, 
 original, and varied picture of many of the 
 very actors in the Exodus, a Jannes mentioned 
 five times, a Moses twice, a Balaam son of 
 Zippor, and the sudden and mysterious death 
 of a prince royal, &c. Since his work was 
 written all the passages adduced by him have 
 been carefully investigated,” and every indica- 
 tion of the presence of the Israelites has dis- 
 appeared. The absence of such indications 
 supplies, if not a conclusive, yet a very strong 
 argument against the hypothesis which they 
 were adduced to support. It may be added 
 that the descriptions of that part of Egypt 
 which had been occupied by the Israelites 
 happen to be both full and graphic in these 
 documents, and they represent it as remarkably 
 rich, fertile, and prosperous, the centre of an 
 extensive commerce, occupied by a vast native 
 population, a land of unceasing festivities and 
 enjoyment, such as the district might well be 
 some centuries after the departure of the 
 Israelites, such as it certainly was not during 
 the period of their cruel persecution, and of 
 the long series of plagues which fell on their 
 oppressors. 
 
 (33.) Wenow come to the reign of Merne- 
 ptah, in which M. Brugsch, and many distin- 
 guished scholars, consider that the Exodus 
 took place. Merneptah succeeded his father 
 Rameses II., and is said to have reigned twenty 
 years. The notices of this Pharaoh in M. 
 Brugsch’s ‘ Histoire d’EKgypte’ are but scanty ; 
 few monuments were erected in his reign; 
 even his father’s tomb was left unfinished ; 
 and the indications of a decline in art, and 
 exhaustion of national resources observable 
 towards the close of his father’s reign, are 
 numerous and strong. There are not, how- 
 ever, on the monuments, or in the papyri of 
 that period, any notices of internal disturb- 
 ances towards the end of his reign; it can be 
 shown that the eastern frontier was vigilantly 
 guarded, and nomad tribes admitted under 
 due precautions to feed their cattle in the 
 extensive district occupied by the herds of 
 Pharaoh.” 
 
 The beginning of this reign was, however, 
 signalised by the complete discomfiture of an 
 
 127 See Mr. Goodwin’s article in the ‘ Cambridge 
 Essays’ for 1858. This remarkable essay at- 
 tracted little notice in England, but made an 
 epoch in one of the most difficult and important 
 branches of Egyptian studies, 
 completely confirmed by M. Chabas and M. de 
 Rougé, ‘ Moise et les Hébreux,’ p. 6. 
 
 128 This is quite uncertain : different recensions 
 of Manetho give nineteen and forty years. The 
 highest regnal year in Egyptian documents 1s the 
 seventh. 
 
 29 See ‘Excursus II.,’ p. 1. The passage here 
 referred to is quoted and translated by M. Chabas, 
 
 ‘Mel. Egypt.,’ ii. p. 155, from the papyrus in 
 
 the British Museum, Anastasi vi. pl. iv. l. 13. 
 
 This opinion is. 
 
 469 
 
 invasion, which presents some points of pecu- 
 liar interest in reference to general history as 
 well as to our present inquiry. ‘The names 
 of the confederates are partly African (not’ 
 negro, but Libyan). and partly Asiatic or: 
 European; if M. de Rougé’s conclusions are 
 admitted, they consisted of Tyrrhenians or 
 Etrurians, Siculi, Sardinians, Acheans, and 
 Lycians, the first appearance of these well- 
 known names in history. None of the names 
 here mentioned enter into the register of 
 ancient people given in the tenth of Gene- 
 sis.8! They were therefore evidently un- 
 known to Moses, who must, however, have 
 had his attention specially drawn to them had 
 he returned to Egypt at that time. The 
 ravages committed by these invaders on the 
 north-west of Egypt are described in language 
 which has an important bearing on a point 
 already discussed; ‘‘nothing,” the king says, 
 ‘“‘has been seen like it even in the times of the. 
 kings of lower Egypt, when the whole coun- 
 try was in their power and reduced to a state 
 of desolation.” 
 
 Merneptah appears to have conducted the 
 campaign with considerable ability: he boasts 
 of the supplies of corn by which he saved his 
 people in some districts from perishing by 
 famine, and of a successful incursion into the 
 enemies’ territories: unlike the Pharaoh ot 
 the Exodus, who led his own army and, 
 perished with it in the Red Sea,™ but like 
 Louis XIV., of whom the reader is constantly 
 reminded in this ostentatious period, Merne- 
 ptah did not expose his sacred person to the. 
 chances of war: “ his grandeur was chained to 
 the bank of the river by the divine command.” 
 The result was a complete victory, the ene-. 
 mies were driven out of Egypt, vast num- 
 bers of prisoners and spoils of great value 
 rewarded the conquerors, obelisks were 
 erected to commemorate the event, and the, 
 customary self-laudations of the Pharaoh, 
 were accepted and echoed by a grateful: 
 people. M. de Rougé observes that the 
 terms in which the Egyptian writer*® de- 
 
 130 M, de Rougé gives a full account of the 
 inscription at Karnak (since published by M., 
 Duemichen) which describes this inyasion.- 
 See ‘Revue Archéologique,’ Juillet et Aoiit, 
 1867. The general tenour was known to M. 
 Brugsch ; see ‘H. E.,’ p. 172. The identifica-' 
 tions of M. de Rougé are maintained with equal’ 
 learning and acuteness, and, as I have. observed’ 
 (since this note was written), they are for the most. 
 part accepted by Dr, Ebers, p. 154. ; 
 
 131 Jt is more than probable that every name in. 
 
 _ that register was known in Egypt, in Phcenicia, 
 
 or Assyria, before Moses wrote ; names not men-> 
 tioned by him were first known in Egypt under; 
 the nineteenth dynasty. If the register had been: 
 written under the kings, as M. Ewald assumes, » 
 the absence of these great names is incon- 
 ceivable. ? 
 . 182 See notes on Exodus, ) 
 183 ¢ Revue Archéologique,’ 1c, M. Rongé. 
 
470 
 
 scribes his triumph are in striking opposition 
 to the severity with which late historians have 
 judged his character. ibaet 
 M. Brugsch lays some stress on an inscrip- 
 tion which proves that Merneptah lost a son 
 who is named on a monument at Tanis.™ 
 This he connects with the death of Pharaoh’s 
 first-born; but it is evident from that inscrip- 
 tion that Merneptah lived some time after his 
 son’s death, certainly a longer time than can 
 be reconciled with the account in Exodus. 
 The little that is actually known of the 
 later years of this Pharaoh militates against 
 the assumption that they were disturbed by a 
 series of tremendous losses. ‘The papyri 
 written about that time or a few years later 
 represent the district of Rameses or Goshen 
 as enjoying peace and remarkable prosperity 
 (see above), and there is reason to believe 
 that the Cheta and Egypt were still in alli- 
 ance (see the last note): a state of affairs 
 which ensured peace on the eastern frontier. 
 On the other hand, the facts thus made 
 known, and the probable inferences from 
 them, harmonise with the account of the con- 
 dition of Palestine in Judges iii. and iv. Jabin, 
 king of Canaan, obtained the complete mas- 
 tery of the north at the close of the period. 
 The designation of this king is obscure; 
 Canaan can scarcely be the name of the whole 
 country or of the whole people descended 
 from the son of Ham. It is possible that Jabin 
 may have taken his title from the great fortress 
 in the north, Pakanana, of which mention is 
 repeatedly made in the campaigns of Seti and 
 Rameses II., retaining that title after his occu- 
 pation of Hazor. In that case he was a Cheta, 
 whether or not we are to identify that people 
 with the Hittites. TThe name of the captain of 
 his host, Sisera, is still more striking. It bears 
 the closest possible resemblance to the prin- 
 cipal Chetan names in the treaty with Rameses, 
 of which one main characteristic is the termina- 
 tion Sar (see note 103). Sisera’s position is alto- 
 gether peculiar, and the most natural explana- 
 tion of it is that he was the chief of the con- 
 federates of Syria, and as such commanding 
 the forces of Jabin. The number of chariots, 
 goo, as I have already remarked, corresponds 
 most remarkably with the 892 taken by 
 
 translates the passage addressed to Merneptah, 
 ‘Bonheur extreme dans ton retour 4 Thebes en 
 vainqueur. On traine ton char avec les mains. 
 Les chefs garrottés sont devant toi, et tu vas 
 les conduire 4 ton pere Amon, mari de sa mere.’ 
 Anastasi, iv. pl. v. l. 1, 2. 
 
 134 The defunct prince is represented in the act 
 of offering a libation and incense to Suteh, the 
 god of Avaris. The deity wears a crown exactly 
 resembling that of the Chetan king. It is 
 curious, and may indicate special amity between 
 Merneptah and that family, with which his own 
 was nearly connected : he may have been a son 
 of the Chetan princess married by Rameses II. 
 in the twenty-second year of his reign. 
 
 ON THE BEARINGS OF EGYPTIAN HISTORY 
 
 Thotmes III., after defeating the confederates 
 of Syria on the same battle-field of Megiddo. 
 
 The important question of dates has still to 
 be considered. The chronology even of this 
 comparatively late period may still be regarded 
 as open to question: but at present nearly 
 all, if not all, Egyptian scholars consider it 
 certain that the year 1320 occurred in the 
 reign of Merneptah. ‘This rests on calcu- 
 lations too lengthy and difficult to be here 
 discussed: the agreement of scholars may 
 suffice, especially as no one assigns an earlier 
 date to the reign. But we have thus very 
 little more than 300 years, at the utmost 320, 
 between the Exodus and the building of the 
 temple. When we deduct from this number 
 the 40 years in the wilderness and some 
 30 years up to the death of Joshua on the 
 one hand, and on the other at least too from 
 the death of Eli to the building of the temple, 
 we get only 150 years for the whole period of 
 the Judges, including the long government of 
 Eli: little more in short than too years for 
 the interval between Joshua and Eli. The 
 events which the most sceptical criticism ac- 
 cepts as historical can by no possibility be com- 
 pressed within so limited an interval: 200 
 years is the very least that any manipulation 
 of the narrative can elicit for those transac- 
 tions; the contradiction is fatal either to the 
 hypothesis of Egyptologers or to the Hebrew 
 records, i.e. either to a conjecture resting on 
 coincidences which scarcely bear a search- 
 ing criticism, or to written documents which 
 all scholars admit to contain a series of au- 
 thentic transactions. On the other hand, 
 if the reign of Merneptah be assumed to 
 coincide, as we have shown to be probable, 
 with the ascendancy of the Chetan Jabin or 
 Sisera, we have as elsewhere a very near ap- 
 proximation to complete agreement : Hebrew 
 chronologers fixing the date of the temple 
 building at roro, and the defeat of Jabin some- 
 where about 1320.5 
 
 (34.) Little is known of the interval between 
 Merneptah and Rameses III.: that it was a - 
 period of weakness and disturbance is tolerably 
 certain, and as such it may supply arguments 
 for either hypothesis, for the Israelites would 
 be left in peace whether they were in the 
 wilderness or in Palestine: if the calculations 
 of Brugsch and other scholars can be depended 
 upon, the duration of the interval was some 
 33 years, nor can there be much room for 
 doubt, since the dates of Merneptah and Ra- 
 
 135 This odd coincidence is unsought. The 
 dates, 1340 for Jabin, 1320 for Barak, are given 
 by Browne, ‘Ordo Seeclorum,’ p. 281. ‘Thenius, 
 ‘ Exegetisches Handbuch,’ vol. iii. p. 469, gives 
 1429 for the death of Joshua, adding, *‘ Von da 
 bis 1188 Othniel, Ehud, Jair, Deborah und 
 Barak, Gideon, Abimelech, Thola, Jair” (a mis- 
 print for Jephtha). ‘This leads nearly to the same 
 conclusion, and gives ample scope for the events 
 of the scriptural narrative. 
 
UPON THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 meses III. are generally accepted. ‘The im- 
 portance of this calculation will be shown 
 presently. 
 
 Rameses III. was the last Egyptian king 
 whose reign was signalised by great victories 
 in Syria. ‘The events are recorded in numerous 
 inscriptions at Medinet Abou, published by 
 M. Duemichen: a manuscript of great extent 
 in the possession of Mr. Harris’® has not yet 
 been printed, but the contents so far as can 
 be ascertained confirm the inscriptions, espe- 
 cially in the historical details. The first years 
 were occupied by wars with the same con- 
 federation of Libyans and Mediterraneans 
 who had been repulsed by Merneptah: these 
 wars began in the fifth and were terminated in 
 the twelfth year of his reign. We have, more- 
 over, notices of an expedition into Syria in the 
 eighth year, probably in the interval between 
 two campaigns in Africa. <A decisive battle 
 was fought in Northern Syria, in which the 
 Cheta are represented as undergoing a com- 
 plete defeat.’ A long list of places attacked or 
 taken in this campaign is given by M. Brugsch 
 (‘ Geographische Inschriften,’ vol. ii. p. 75), 
 and some are identified with names well known 
 in Scripture. Of these by far the larger 
 number belong to Syria,* and the general 
 result from the notices of the war in the in- 
 scription would seem to be that this Pharaoh, 
 like his predecessors, traversed Palestine 
 rapidly, not diverging from the usual high 
 
 186 This is one of the most beautiful and inte- 
 resting of existing papyri; it may be hoped that 
 it will be ere long in the British Museum, and 
 published and translated by Dr. Birch, a scholar 
 to whom Egyptian students are under the very 
 deepest obligation. 
 
 187 Rameses III. employed a large fleet in this 
 war, and of course transported the greater part 
 of his forces into Syria by sea. See Brugsch 
 and De Rougé. 
 
 138 The only names which are held to belong to 
 Palestine proper are each and all questionable : 
 Jamnia, Azer, Duma, Hebron, alone are iden- 
 tified by Brugsch ; the last is more probably the 
 name of a city often mentioned in the inscrip- 
 tions referring to Northern Syria. A repeated 
 examination of the names in this list, and of 
 those which occur in Duemichen’s inscriptions, 
 confirm my impression that Rameses did not 
 occupy Palestine either before or after his 
 Syrian campaign ; some few places he may pro- 
 bably have captured on his way. If, however, 
 Chibur or Hebron be the city in Judzea, it would 
 be a strong argument that Rameses III. found 
 the Hebrews there ; the Canaanitish name was 
 Kirjath Arba; the old name given at its first 
 building before Abraham, was probably restored 
 after the conquest. 
 
 139 The Philistines were in possession of their 
 five cities in the time of Rameses III., and are 
 represented among his captives: see Brugsch, 
 ‘G. L.,’ ii. pl. xi. This agrees with the notices 
 of a considerable advance of the Philistines 
 in Judges iii. They probably retook the cities 
 which had been conquered by Joshua, 
 
 A7I 
 
 road, nor losing time in the siege of strong- 
 holds occupied by a people who were cer- 
 tainly not confederates of his formidable 
 enemies. Among the conquered chiefs repre- 
 sented on the walls of Medinet Abou are 
 found the king of the Cheta and the: king of 
 the Amorites: from other notices it is known 
 that both designations at that period belong to 
 the district north of Palestine. 
 
 Bringing these facts to bear upon the two 
 hypotheses, we observe that, on the assump- 
 tion that the Exodus took place under Merne- 
 ptah, the campaign of Rameses III. would 
 exactly coincide with the entrance of Joshua ; 
 and inasmuch as this king reigned at least 
 twenty-six years,/*° the conquest of Canaan 
 would have been begun and nearly completed 
 while his ascendancy was undisputed. ‘The 
 improbability is obvious. 
 
 On the other hand, we have the following 
 indications in support of the opposite hypo- 
 thesis. Accepting the Aperu as Hebrews, we 
 find that a considerable number, evidently 
 prisoners of war, were employed on the royal 
 domain in this reign, and in the quarries of 
 Hamamat under his immediate successor (see 
 note 114). We observe also that after the 
 overthrow of Jabin the peace of Palestine was 
 undisturbed, as might be expected after the 
 discomfiture of the Chetan confederacy, when 
 the Pharaohs were occupied with the internal 
 affairs of Egypt.! The outbreak of the 
 Midianites, described in the sixth of Judges, 
 took place some years later, and was probably 
 a result of the increasing weakness of the 
 monarchy. It will be remembered, however, 
 that the general ascendancy of Egypt in Syria 
 and Mesopotamia was unimpaired to the very 
 end of the twentieth dynasty, an era which, 
 according to all systems of chronology, syn- 
 chronises with the termination of the period 
 embraced in the book of Judges. Palestine 
 in the mean time went through a series of 
 alternate struggles and successes. ‘That Israel 
 was not crushed or absorbed by the great 
 empires between whom its little territory lay, 
 and by whom it was ultimately subjugated, 
 may be attributed, under God’s providence, 
 to their mutual rivalry and nearly balanced 
 power; it was frequently overrun by nomad 
 hordes and conterminous nations, Midianites, 
 Amalekites, Ammonites, and Philistines; but 
 the character of the people was gradually 
 matured, and prepared for the vast develop- 
 ment of its resources and institutions under 
 
 140 The date 26 is found in the Serapeum of 
 Memphis: Brugsch, ‘H. E.,’ p. 193. 
 
 141 Numerous inscriptions and some papyri 
 prove that Rameses III. and his successors were 
 employed in developing the resources of Egypt, 
 and in building palaces and temples. Rameses 
 IV., his son, boasts that he had erected as many 
 monuments in a few years as Rameses II. had 
 
 done in his long reign, M. de Rougé, ‘ Etudes 
 égypt.,’ p. 29. 
 
~ 
 
 472 
 
 Saul, David, and Solomon, in whose reigns it 
 vindicated its claim to equality with the con- 
 temporary empires in Africa and Asia. 
 
 It would be too much to expect that the 
 conclusions to which the writer of this dis- 
 sertation has been irresistibly led will be ac- 
 cepted by those who are satisfied with a 
 system which rests on the authority of many 
 great names; but the greatest care has been 
 taken throughout to separate the facts, which 
 are positively ascertained, from the inferences 
 which must to a certain extent vary according 
 to the state of the reader’s mind, his judgment, 
 or his prepossessions. ‘Those facts are stated 
 with all possible care, and with as much of 
 compicteness as is compatible with the limits 
 
 ON THE BEARINGS OF EGYPTIAN HISTORY, ETC. 
 
 of an Excursus. They have been submitted 
 to the judgment of scholars, and have an inde= 
 pendent value; nor, although every year brings 
 important additions to our knowledge of the 
 texts and of their interpretation, is it to be 
 feared that what has hitherto been gained will 
 be overthrown, or the fair and legitimate in- 
 ferences be considerably modified. The truth 
 of the scriptural narrative does not need such 
 support, but some important links are sup- 
 plied; the series and meaning of events are 
 better understood in the light thrown upon 
 them by contemporary documents which 
 present coincidences and suggest combinations 
 hitherto unknown, or imperfectly appreciated, 
 by the students of Holy Writ. 
 
 . Since this Essay was printed, two points of great importance to the argument have been 
 illustrated. (1.) In the work lately published by Duemichen, ‘The Fleet of an Egyptian 
 Queen from the seventeenth century before our Era,’ we have an account of an expedition 
 into Poumt, i.e. Arabia. It proves that a considerable navy was fitted out early under the 
 18th dynasty; on one plate (xxviii.) the gradual improvement in ship-building is shown by 
 drawings from the 6th, 12th, 17th, and 18th dynasties; on two ships the transport of horses 
 and chariots is represented. (2.) M. Lieblein has published in the last number of the ‘ Revue 
 Archeéologique’ (October, 1868) a letter to M. de Rougé, in which he gives very strong 
 reasons for bringing down the date of Rameses II. to the twelfth century. Without 
 accepting all his conclusions, we can scarcely resist the impression that the lowest date 
 hitherto assigned to the 18th dynasty is remarkably confirmed by his arguments. See also 
 ‘ Zeitschrift,’ 1869, p. 122, where the same writer fixes the date of Rameses II. at 1134 B.C. 
 This argument, however, rests on genealogical calculations, which are always open to objec- 
 tion. 
 
 The writer has lately ascertained that the. copper-mines in the peninsula of Sinai were 
 not worked by the Egyptians from the time when they obtained supplies of copper from 
 Syria, i.e. from the reign of Tothmosis I."** to the seventeenth year of Tothmosis III., when 
 an expedition was sent under military escort—the last occasion on which the presence of 
 Egyptians is noticed. ‘There were therefore no Egyptians settled on the peninsula at the date 
 assigned to the Exodus in this Essay. ‘This important fact is established, though without 
 reference to the Exodus, in an essay by Dr. Gensler, in the Egyptian ‘Zeitschrift, for 
 October and November, 1870. | . 
 
 1? This transcription now appears to the writer preferable to that which has been adopted in 
 these Essays. 
 
SUMMARY VIEW, ETC. ° 
 
 473 
 
 A SUMMARY VIEW OF THE TRANSACTIONS ATTESTED BY EGYPTIAN 
 MONUMENTS, AND OF THEIR CONNECTION WITH HEBREW HISTORY. 
 
 DYNASTIES. 
 
 XIIth Dynasty: 
 seven Pharaohs, 
 from Amenemha I. 
 to Amenemha IV., 
 and a queen regnant. 
 
 XITith to XVIIth Dy- 
 nasty : 
 
 XVIIIth Dynasty : 
 
 Aahmes I. (Amosis) 
 
 Nefertari, 
 
 Amenotep I, or Ame- 
 nophis. 
 
 Thotmes I. 
 
 Thotmes II, and 
 Hatasou. 
 
 TRANSACTIONS KNOWN FROM CONTEMPORARY 
 MONUMENTS, 
 
 A period of great prosperity ; foreigners, 
 especially from Western Asia, re- 
 ceived and promoted under the early 
 kings; and under the later kings 
 works of extraordinary magnitude 
 executed to secure the irrigation of 
 Egypt, and to guard against the re- 
 currence of famine. 
 
 The early Pharaohs still masters of 
 Egypt. Invasion of the Hyksos. 
 Salatis master of Avaris, ze. Tanis, or 
 Zoan. Egypt divided: the worship of 
 Set, Sutech, or Baal, established by 
 the Hyksos in the north ; wars be- 
 tween the Theban dynasty and Apepi 
 or Apophis, the last king of the 
 Hyksos. 
 
 Aahmes J. or Amosis captures Avaris 
 and expels the Hyksos. Buildings of 
 great extent undertaken or completed 
 with the aid of forced labourers or 
 mercenaries. The worship of the 
 Theban deities re-established, 
 
 The Egyptian Queen, a Nubian by 
 birth, possessed of great influence, 
 both before and after the death of 
 Aahmes. 
 
 Expeditions into Ethiopia: the Queen- 
 sister in power ; succeeding as Regent. 
 
 Expeditions into Nubia and Mesopo- 
 -tamia ; immense increase of the Egyp- 
 tian power. 
 
 -First part of the reign prosperous ; no 
 
 indication of foreign or intestine war ; 
 latter part of the reign a blank, fol- 
 lowed by a general revolt of the con- 
 federates in Syria. Hatasou, queen 
 regnant, and retaining power for 
 seventeen or twenty-two years, 
 
 Abraham 
 
 Joseph 
 
 According to this 
 Excursus. 
 
 re- 
 ceived and fa- 
 voured. 
 
 saves 
 Egypt from fa- 
 mine; the Pha- 
 raoh master of 
 the resources of 
 
 Egypt. 
 
 The Israelites in 
 
 Goshen rapidly 
 increasing and 
 occupying the 
 whole district, 
 but in a con- 
 dition of depen- 
 dence, or partial 
 servitude, 
 
 Beginning of a 
 systematic per- 
 secution of the 
 Israelites, who 
 areemployed as 
 forced labourers 
 in restoring or 
 building forts 
 and magazines 
 in their own 
 district. 
 
 Moses saved and 
 
 adopted by 
 an | Egyptian 
 princess. 
 
 Flight of Moses 
 
 into Midian. 
 
 Return of Moses,’ 
 
 the Exodus, 
 destruction of 
 Pharaoh and 
 his army. 
 
 CONNECTION WITH SCRIPTURAL HISTORY, 
 
 According to 
 Brugsch 
 and others, 
 
 ny 
 
 Abraham in 
 Egypt under 
 the Hyksos. 
 Joseph mini- 
 ster of Apo- 
 phis. 
 
 The Israelites 
 are supposed. 
 to remain 
 during the 
 whole period 
 of the 18th 
 dynasty. in 
 undisturbed 
 possession of 
 the district of 
 Goshen. 
 
474 SUMMARY VIEW OF TRANSACTIONS 
 CONNECTION WITH SCRIPTURAL HISTORY, 
 p TRANSACTIONS KNOWN FROM CONTEMPORARY : 
 DY NABTIES « MONUMENTS. According to this | According to 
 Excursus. Brugsch 
 and others. 
 
 : 
 
 Thotmes III. First attempt to recover the ascendancy | The Israelites in 
 
 a ES 
 
 Syria, and the Cheta and nations of 
 Mesopotamia, broken and subdued by 
 
 in Syria in the 22nd year. Wars: | the wilderness ; 
 repeated incursions into Palestine, | entrance into 
 Phoenicia, Syria, and Mesopotamia, Palestine of 
 terminating in the fortieth year} Joshua in the 
 of this reign fortieth year 
 after the Exo- 
 dus. ; 
 Amenotep (Ameno- | Expedition into Syria by sea: over- | Progress of the 
 phis) IL. throw of the confederated nations to | Israelites in 
 the north of Palestine. Palestine, 
 Thotmes IV. A reign without notable occurrences. 
 Amenotep III. A prosperous reign ; supremacy main- 
 tained in Syria and Mesopotamia : no 
 intimations of warfare in Palestine: 
 the Queen Tei of foreign origin 
 favours a new and purer form of 
 religion. 
 Amenotep IV. or | The religious revolution completed: | Cushan Risha- 
 Khu-en-Aten. followed by a period of disturbance | thaim in Pales- 
 Princes not considered and exhaustion. tine. 
 legitimate. 
 _ Horemheb. End of eighteenth dynasty. 
 XIXth Dynasty : No considerable events ; notices of war | The interval be- 
 Rameses I. with the Cheta, who from this time | tween Cushan 
 are dominant in Syria. Rishathaim, and 
 Jabin, extends 
 Seti I The Shasous or Nomads from Egypt to | to the latter 
 
 reigns in this 
 dynasty. Pales- 
 
 a series of invasions. The empire | tineremains, to 
 reaches its highest poiut of civilisation | a great extent, 
 and power. in the posses- 
 
 sion of the 
 
 Rameses IT. During many years Rameses II. is | Amorites and | First begin- 
 co-regent with his father with royal | other people of | ning of the 
 dignity. On his accession as sole | Canaan; some- | persecution 
 monarch, he invades Syria, defeats | times overrun | of the Israel- 
 the Cheta, with whose king, how- | by neighbour- | ites ; the 
 ever, he afterwards contracts an | ingpeople, and | birth, early 
 alliance on equal terms, marrying his | towards the | life, and exile 
 daughter. Captives are employed in | close of the | of Moses. 
 great numbers in building, restoring, | period subject 
 or enlarging fortresses, cities, and | to the Philis- 
 temples ; among them Aperu at Pa- | tines in_ the } 
 
 Rameses and Memphis. The reign | south, and the 
 lasts sixty-seven years, but the date | Cheta, or Hit- 
 of its commencement, whether from tites, in the. 
 his father’s death, or his admission to | north. 
 
 royalty, is uncertain. 
 
 Memeptah,. Beginning of reign signalised by victory ee The plagues’ 
 over Libyan and Mediterranean in- of Egypt, fol- 
 vaders : no expeditions into Asia: lowed by the 
 general state of amity with the Exodus. 
 
 Cheta: eastern frontier of Egypt 
 carefully guarded : indications of un- 
 broken peace and prosperity in the 
 district about Pa-Rameses, 
 
ATTESTED BY EGYPTIAN MONUMENTS. 475 
 
 re err ee eetereemninnnienicainnsinksassmenamindemisnannnase 
 | 
 CONNECTION WITH SCRIPTURAL HISTORY. 
 
 TRANSACTIONS KNOWN FROM CONTEMPORARY Tae F 
 | According to 
 
 DYNASTIES, 
 
 MONUMENTS, According to this Brae 
 Excursus. Fugen 
 and others. 
 
 Seti II., Siptah; is 
 close of XIXth 
 Dynasty. 
 
 wars : letters, however, flourish, and 
 the nation appears to be peaceful and | 
 contented. 
 
 XXth Dynasty : 
 Rameses III. Africa and Asia: Palestine traversed, 
 
 Syria invaded, and the Cheta over- 
 
 thrown. The reign lasts at least 
 
 twenty-seven years. Aperu employed 
 
 on the royal domains. 
 
 Rameses IV. A peaceful reign occupied chiefly in 
 great buildings. Aperu, captives of 
 war, employed in the quarries. 
 
 Rameses V. to XI. ; A period of uncertain duration, the 
 reigns generally short and undistin- 
 guished. 
 
 Rameses XII. In this reign the Egyptians retain an 
 
 acknowledged pre-eminence in Syria 
 and Mesopotamia. 
 
 Rameses XIIT. | Close of the twentieth dynasty. 
 
 state of depres- 
 sion, Philis- 
 tines in the 
 south, Jabin in 
 the north ; re- 
 
 volt against 
 Jabin, _ over- 
 throw of Sisera, 
 
 war against Ja- 
 bin continued 
 for some years. 
 
 A long series of successful wars in | Israelites recover 
 
 possession of 
 Palestine after 
 the overthrow 
 of Jabin. 
 
 The events re- 
 
 corded in the 
 book of Judges 
 after the time 
 of Deborah and 
 Barak. 
 
 A period not distinguished by foreign | Palestine in a | The Israelites 
 
 in the wil- 
 derness. 
 
 The conquest 
 of Palestine 
 begun under 
 
 Joshua, 
 The entire 
 series of 
 
 events from 
 the passage 
 over the Jor- 
 
 dan to the 
 close of the 
 book of 
 Judges. 
 
(- 476-) 
 
 ESSAY II. 
 ON EGYPTIAN WORDS IN THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 ONE important result of late Egyptian re- 
 searches is the establishment of a complete 
 system of transcription of Hebrew and Egyp- 
 tian characters. At present no doubt remains 
 as to the exact correspondence of the Hebrew 
 letters with phonetic signs, or groups of com- 
 mon occurrence in papyri and monumental 
 inscriptions. An attempt will be here made to 
 bring this result to bear upon the transcription 
 and explanation of the names, titles, and other 
 words of Egyptian origin in the Pentateuch.’ 
 In the first place, the Hebrew word will be 
 represented in those Egyptian characters which 
 are accepted by all Egyptologers as the exact, 
 and for the most part the invariable, equiva- 
 lents. In the next place, the meaning of the 
 Egyptian words thus represented will, be 
 investigated. In no case will any doubtful 
 transcription be admitted: nor will any mean- 
 ing be proposed for which conclusive autho- 
 rity cannot be produced from monuments or 
 papyri of the 18th, r9th, and 20th dynasties, 
 or from still earlier periods. If the interpre- 
 tation thus elicited give a clear, complete, 
 aud satisfactory meaning, one in perfect ac- 
 cordance with the context, and the evident 
 intention of the writer of the Pentateuch, there 
 can be no question as to its value, whether 
 in regard to the bearings upon the exegesis of 
 the Book or upon the question of authorship. 
 It is highly improbable that any Hebrew born 
 and brought up in Palestine, within the period 
 extending from the Exodus to the accession 
 of Solomon, would have had the knowledge 
 of the Egyptian language which will thus be 
 shown to have been possessed by the writer ; 
 it is certain that no author would have given 
 the words without any explanation, or even 
 indication, of their meaning, had he not known 
 He his readers would be equally familiar with 
 them. 
 
 The following table, which gives the Hebrew 
 characters and the corresponding phonetic 
 signs or letters in Egyptian, will enable the 
 reader to judge for himself of the accuracy 
 of the transcription. ‘The transcription in 
 Roman characters is that which has been 
 lately proposed by M. de Rougé, and ac- 
 cepted by Lepsius, Brugsch, and other Egyp- 
 tologers. See ‘ Zeitschrift fir A¢gyptische 
 Sprache,’ &c., 1866. 
 
 1 This Essay was printed in 1868. Since that 
 time Dr. Ebers’ work has appeared, to which 
 allusion is occasionally made in the notes. 
 
 s Core: The beso 
 . ti as +i 
 5 Egypian, Tiensorip. aahiecy he 
 = tion. racters. 
 S f x \ or A—f a, ora a 
 5 | 14 > b 
 Gl AS k g 
 is eee t d 
 n | Gt h h 
 | h8 Pa 
 n i )or h, or x | h, orch, hard 
 a) a + ft t, or th 
 ’ | jor\s rT i, or ee 
 > 74 k k 
 * ca Lore l,orr 
 » |X a. 
 3 | nn n n 
 DB 1 ( 8 8 
 y | a vor pm | 5 | a, 0, Or ao 
 | f | p,ph, orf 
 5 eB eee Pp; or ’ ’ 
 | v Ta | 
 Y = rr t z, or ts 
 p k k 
 7 <=> r r. 
 Yv , oss malt 8 sh, or s 
 n 1 or & t th, or ¢ 
 
 In addition to the phonetic letters in this 
 list there are many homophones, and syllabic 
 signs, representing the combination of two 
 or more letters. Full lists of these are given 
 by Mr. Birch in the first and last volumes of 
 the latest edition of Bunsen’s ‘ Egypt; and 
 by M. de Rougé, in the ‘Chrestomathie,’ 
 now in course of publication. ‘These signs 
 will be explained when they occur in this ex- 
 cursus: they are especially important in 
 
ESSAY ON EGYPTIAN WORDS. 
 
 ‘reference to the names of places and official 
 designations. 
 _ It must be borne in mind that the vowels 
 ‘are of secondary importance both in Hebrew 
 and Egyptian. They might be disregarded in 
 the transcription were it not that certain 
 affinities between some consonants and vowels 
 are observable in both languages. 
 
 The first name in the Bible of purely Egyp- 
 tian origin, form, and meaning, is Pharaoh. 
 
 HTB 
 
 The vocalisation and diacritic points show 
 that the Hebrews read this Par-aoh, not 
 Pa-raoh. ‘This is important, since the name, 
 whatever it might signify, was well known as 
 ‘the proper official designation of the kings of 
 Egypt, and its correct pronunciation must 
 have been familiar to the translators of the 
 Pentateuch, and probably also to the punctua- 
 tors of the Bible. ‘The cuneiform inscrip- 
 tions have the same division, Pir-u, not Pi-ru. 
 
 The transcription gives one of these forms: 
 
 <—— . : 
 pe: , (Pa Ra), or, adopting a syllabic 
 form of very common occurrence, EJ i.e. 
 
 Per, or Phar, 15,and the elongated form ———> 
 which more exactly represents ry, we have 
 C,41<+— (Par-aoh), or one of the ordi- 
 
 nary variants of this well-known word. 
 
 The first of these transcriptions gives a 
 clear and not improbable meaning, viz., ‘The 
 Sun,” Ra is the well-known designation of 
 the sun from sunrise to sunset; and it is 
 certain that the King of Egypt was regarded 
 as the favourite or living representative of 
 Ra: the question is, whether this was the 
 usual and formal designation of the king, recog- 
 nised by his subjects and known to foreigners. 
 
 Several arguments are used in support of 
 this assumption. 
 
 1. From a very early period, long before 
 the Hebrews came into contact with the 
 
 Egyptians, the sign (-) » pronounced Ra, was 
 
 the first and most prominent word in the 
 cartouche, or ring, which contained the offi- 
 cial name of every Pharaoh, that is, the name 
 which he assumed at his accession. 
 
 But this word was not read apart from the 
 other words in the ring, in most cases it was 
 read at the end, not at the beginning of the 
 designation; it had not the article prefixed, 
 and could not therefore be pronounced Pa 
 Ra, or Pharaoh. 
 
 _ 2, The king is always called Si Ra, son of 
 Ra. ‘This designation comes between the 
 two rings. It is very ancient, being first 
 borne by Chafra or Chephren. See M. de 
 Rougé, ‘ Recherches,’ p. 56. 
 
 . But this is in_reality an. argument against 
 the assumption. The king was-not likely to 
 be called both Son of Ra, and The Ra. 
 
 477 
 
 _3. The word Pa Ra actually occurs as a 
 title of Merneptah Hotephima, the son of 
 Rameses II., in a contemporary papyrus, 
 Anastasi, VI. Pl. v. 1. 2. 
 
 oe thle ob sae 2 
 
 The sovereign, living, sound, and mighty, te 
 good Sun of the whole land. 
 
 But “the good Sun” here is not a title, 
 properly speaking. It is simply one of the 
 numerous epithets applied by the Egyptians to 
 their king; a fact sufficiently evident from the 
 addition of the adjective good.? The title in 
 
 this passage is the first word however, 
 
 o— 
 CAA) 
 that may be read and explained. 
 
 4. A stronger argument is drawn from the 
 Papyrus Rollin (No. 1888), which gives an 
 account of the trial and execution of a sor- 
 cerer under Rameses III. It is explained by M. 
 Chabas, in his curious and valuable work, ‘ Le 
 Papyrus magique d’Harris” He writes thus 
 
 (p. 173, n. 2), “ 55 a A, Pera, le Soleil, 
 
 Memph. dpa, Heb. AY73, designation ordi- 
 naire des rois d’Egypt.” ‘This seems con- 
 clusive, considerng the high authority which 
 always attaches to M. Chabas’ opinion. It 
 must, however, be observed that no other 
 passage is adduced, nor, so far as I am aware, 
 can be adduced, in support of the statement 
 that it is the ordinary designation of the sove- 
 reign; and in this passage the word is under- 
 stood by Mr. Deveria, and by M. Pleyte (who 
 has lately published the papyrus) to mean “ the 
 Sun God,” to whom the frustration of the 
 sorcerer is attributed.* It is true that the kings 
 of Egypt were called “ Horus,” orthe “ Crowned 
 Hawk” (the Sun God, as symbol of vic- 
 tory), a title taken at their accession, and 
 borne upon their standard; but this was 
 equivalent to the epithet Si Ra, Son of 
 Ra, and constitutes, therefore, an argument 
 against the assumption, which, if not disproved, 
 must be regarded as not proven. 
 
 - We have now to consider the other and 
 
 well-known form, Cj 1t<—, more com- 
 
 monly as above, in the title of Merneptah, 
 =<i4—— 
 
 eae pt 
 Phar-ao, can be relied upon, of which we 
 have presently to consider the evidence, the 
 proof of the identity of the title with Pha- 
 
 If the transcription Per-ao, or 
 
 2 Thus Rameses II. is called ‘‘ Ra, the life of 
 the world,” not as an appellation, but an epithet. 
 Mariette, ‘ Abydos,’ pl. 18, 1. 36. 
 
 3 Mr. Goodwin observes, ‘‘I am now con- 
 vinced that Pa-Ra in the Rollin Papyrus means 
 the Sun, or God, and not, as I supposed ten 
 years ago when I first deciphered that papyrus, 
 the king or Pharaoh.” Mr. Goodwin’s remarks, 
 quoted in these notes, are taken from a letter 
 lately received on this Essay, which was for~ 
 warded to him by the writer in 1868, 
 
478 
 
 raoh will be conclusive, for the following 
 reasons :— 
 
 The regular title of the King of Egypt, 
 the title, 7. ¢., as distinguished from honorary 
 epithets, by which it is always accom- 
 
 panied, is UC -l, written also [ji<—, 
 <——— 
 
 and £ la 9 OY ~-4c7, ‘These forms occur 
 
 very frequently under the ancient Empire, in 
 the inscriptions of the Denkmeler of Lepsius, 
 and in those examined and illustrated by M. 
 de Rougé, ‘Recherches sur les Monuments 
 qu’on peut attribuer aux six premiceres Dynas- 
 ties de Manéthon.’ ‘The simpler form is more 
 commonly found in the earlier inscriptions. 
 On monuments of the 19th and following 
 dynasties the latter is almost exclusively used. 
 ‘The meaning of the group is not questioned, 
 viz., the great house, or the great double 
 house, 7.e., the royal palace: nor is it doubted 
 that it stands absolutely for the sovereign. 
 It is further to be observed that whenever 
 the sovereign is spoken of as such, not by his 
 proper name, or by his distinctive official 
 name, this and no other designation is found. 
 In official letters, in reports and in treaties, 
 this designation generally precedes the proper 
 and official names: in narratives, when the 
 name of the king is not given, it is used pre- 
 cisely in the same way as Pharaoh in the 
 Bible* ‘There can be no doubt but that this 
 was the title which to Egyptians and foreigners 
 represented the person of the king. 
 
 It is perhaps difficult to present the full 
 force of this argument; but no one can look 
 through the Papyrus D’Orbiney, or other 
 papyri of the 19th and zoth dynasties, without 
 feeling that, so far as the usage is con- 
 cerned, we have in this group the exact equi- 
 valent of Pharaoh. «It is the group which 
 would necessarily be used if Genesis were 
 translated into ancient Egyptian. Pharaoh 
 alone would represent to a Hebrew the 
 central group in the Egyptian formula :—“ His 
 majesty the Sovereign, full of life, health, and 
 might.” 
 
 But the transcription presents a difficulty, 
 which for a long time prevented Egyptian 
 scholars from recognising the identity of the 
 
 designations. The group oi is undoubt- 
 
 edly equivalent to ‘5, or “Pi” in the names 
 of cities, as in Pithom, Pihahiroth, &c. M. 
 de Rougé, however, and M. Brugsch, men of 
 the highest eminence among Egyptologers, 
 whose authority on such a point is especially 
 important, hold that the original and proper 
 
 4 The word occurs ten times in seven lines of 
 the Papyrus D’Orbiney, from p. x. 1. 9, to p. xi. 
 1. 4. It has almost invariably the addition of 
 
 2 b, (., living, sound, and mighty ; and is gene- 
 rally preceded by ‘‘ honef,” his majesty. 
 
 ESSAY ON EGYPTIAN WORDS 
 
 3947 44 ” 14 ” 
 pronunciation of cid was per, or pere, 
 
 in Hebrew 15.5 It is possible that the r, 
 by the common process of phonetic decay, 
 was gradually disused in a word of common 
 occurrence, but it may have been, and pro- 
 bably was, retained in a title of such dignity, 
 especially as it preceded the vowel sound 
 HOY 
 
 Another difficulty is presented by the dual 
 
 If C304 actually represented two 
 
 distinct houses, it would be read either Pere 
 pere or Pere-ti: but as representing not a 
 numerical dual, but a form of majesty, the old 
 pronunciation might be, and probably was, 
 retained unchanged. M. Brugsch (D. H., p. 
 452) gives several instances which seem to 
 prove that though the sign of the house-plan 
 
 form. 
 
 [J 1s doubled, it was pronounced in the sin- 
 
 gular. However this may be, it is a sufficient 
 answer to the objection that the original form, 
 as we have already seen, the form most com- 
 monly found in inscriptions unquestion- 
 ably much older than the Pentateuch, was 
 
 Ce ®, of which the nearest possible 
 
 transcription in Hebrew is my, Pharaoh. 
 Another argument, which may be regarded 
 as conclusive, has been adduced by M. C. 
 Lenormant, and Professor Lauth, a dis- 
 tinguished Egyptologer. It is clear that 
 
 5 See ‘Chrestomathie Egyptienne,’ p. 79, and 
 ‘ Dictionnaire Hieroglyphique,’ pp. 452, 482-3. 
 This is questioned by M. Page Renouf, a very 
 high authority; but a reference to Mr. Birch’s 
 Dictionary, in Bunsen’s ‘Egypt,’ vol. v. p. 464, 
 will shew the invariable connection between 
 
 CA and =, and one variant at least of -4 
 
 for et points in the same direction. I believe 
 
 M. de Rougé to be, as usual, right in his con- 
 clusion. See also M. Chabas,. ‘Pap. Mag. 
 Harris,’ p. 48, and ‘ Mél. Eg.’ ii. p. 204. The 
 
 group cs ! q C. is found in ancient in- 
 
 scriptions, and proves the phonetic value of the 
 shorter form. Mr. Goodwin observes, ‘‘ there 
 
 can be no doubt that C7 was originally par:” 
 
 he adds, ‘‘I agree with your remark that in such 
 a title the pronunciation would very probably be 
 retained.” 
 
 6 Thus, for instance, M. de Rougé renders 
 
 cI 2 ; 
 Vs suten rech (z.é., near relative, perhaps 
 
 grandson), du Pharaon, ‘Rech.’ p.97. Numerous 
 inscriptions in the Denkmeeler, Abt. IT., leave 
 no doubt as to the usage. I find that Dr. Ebers 
 adopts the same view, and considers it as un- 
 questionably correct, p. 264. Thus also Due- 
 michen, who gives an example from the time 
 of Thotmes III. See ‘Fleet of an Egyptian 
 Queen,’ pl. vi. 
 
INV Ia, PENTA TEVUCH: 
 
 this transcription exactly explains the asser- 
 tion of Horapollo, 1,61; viz. that oikos péyas, 
 “the great house,” is the true meaning of the 
 hieroglyphic group which formally represents 
 the Egyptian king, and which therefore is the 
 equivalent of the Hebrew Pharaoh. 
 
 Other derivations of the word have been 
 proposed, more or less unsatisfactory. The 
 late Duke of Northumberland suggested that 
 it might be identified with the Ureus (in 
 
 Egyptian =, oY arat), the basilisk on 
 
 the diadem of every Pharaoh, To this the 
 objections are insuperable. The transcription 
 is inexact; the word is never found as a 
 royal designation; and when the sign stands 
 alone it represents a female deity. 
 
 The identification with the Coptic Oe po 
 was natural. It is the general designation of 
 a king; but it appears to represent Pa-Oer, a 
 word constantly employed in the texts to 
 represent a prince, whether native or foreign, 
 but which is never applied to the Pharaoh. 
 Mr. Birch has lately shown the writer two 
 passages in the 5th volume of the Denkmeler, 
 
 pl. 53, in which (2. @ ), or (2e )» appears 
 
 to stand for Pharaoh. It would seem, how- 
 ever, to be a proper name, not a title or 
 general designation. 
 
 YOS"i5, Potiphera, 
 and 
 “5°15, Potiphar. 
 
 The first part of both names is admitted to 
 correspond to the Egyptian cy yy 4, Pa-ti, 
 
 “the given,” ze, a person devoted to, de- 
 pendent upon, &c. Instances are given by 
 Champollion (not in the Grammar, but in the 
 Précis), and by Rosellini, who says that 
 the form occurs frequently in the name 
 
 Ce 6) Gh , Patipara, of which yap wip 
 
 is an exact transcription. The name signified 
 “ devoted to Ra,” the most natural designation 
 for the High Priest of On or Heliopolis, the 
 head-quarters of Sun worship. ‘This deriva- 
 tion is well known and universally accepted. 
 It may perhaps be used as an additional 
 
 argument that C1 .). Pa Ra, represented the 
 
 Sun-God, not the Sovereign. 
 
 The other name presents more difficulty. 
 Gesenius and others assume that Potiphar is 
 simply an abbreviation or a variant of Potiphera. 
 ‘This is very improbable. ‘The transcription 
 of Egyptian words in Hebrew is now ad- 
 mitted by scholars to be exceedingly accurate, 
 and the omission of the characteristic letter 
 a, “omega Y, would be without a_ parallel. 
 The meaning of the word must be “ devoted 
 
 47) 
 
 to Par,” or Phar. If the transcription of 
 £3, 5, Phar, be accepted (see above), 
 
 Potiphar would signify devoted to, or de- 
 pendent upon the house or palace, and would 
 
 be written in Egyptian Fat od A « Though 
 
 this name does not occur in the texts it 
 seems to be in accordance with the usage 
 of the language,’ and is a very suitable desig- 
 nation for the captain of Pharaoh's body- 
 guard. ‘The priest thus takes his name from 
 the deity to whose service he is attached, the 
 courtier from his master’s house. 
 
 nds 
 Asenath, wife of Joseph. 
 The first syllable may be transcribed by 
 
 the exact phonetic equivalent, or by 
 ? 
 
 either of two well-known groups Ah | at oie 
 
 or © the name of Isis, which has the 
 z 
 same phonetic value. 
 
 The second part may be read nips with 
 ? 
 
 =“ 
 
 the determinative or any of the nu- 
 
 sy 
 
 merous variants. It represents the goddess 
 Neit, or Neith, the Athene of Greece. 
 
 The combination of these transcriptions, 
 whichever is adopted, gives a clear meaning 
 in accordance with Egyptian usage. 
 
 As-Neit would mean favourite of Neith, or 
 Minerva: the word “ as” signifies precious, 
 sacred, or consecrated. 
 
 he a ed would mean _Isis-Neith. 
 
 The double name seems strange, but it was 
 not uncommon in Egypt thus to combine the 
 names of two Deities in one proper name. 
 The first example of a man’s name taken from 
 
 7 We have xerp-pere, mer-pere = house- 
 steward, major-domo: common titles under the 
 ancient empire. I must add that Mr. Goodwin 
 does not admit the probability of this transcrip- 
 tion, which needs the support of ancient inscrip- 
 tions. 
 
 8 Mr. Goodwin has lately proposed a different 
 reading for this sign, viz., ‘‘sheps,” and he is 
 followed by Brugsch; but both M. Le Page 
 Renouf and Professor Lauth have since proved 
 that ‘‘as” is the true value in the older texts. 
 See ‘Zeitschrift fiir AZgyptische Sprache,’ &c., 
 1868, pp. 42 and 45. Thus also Maspero, 
 ‘Essai,’ p. 16. Since this was printed, I have 
 
 observed as a variant in Mariette’s 
 
 ‘Fouilles d'Abydos.’ Mr. Goodwin now says 
 he can only admit that the group is a polyphone, 
 and may have both values, He adds that he 
 considers the combination Isis Neit supplies a 
 much more plausible explanation. 
 
480 
 
 the gods, given by Champollion in the Gram- 
 mar, p. 135, combines the two divine names 
 Hor Phre, a second in the same page com- 
 bines Chons and Thot. It is a strong argu- 
 ment in support of this explanation that a 
 Priest of On would naturally give to his 
 daughter the name of a Deity specially con- 
 nected with the locality. The principal ob- 
 iects of worship, next to the Sun-God, were 
 Seb and Nut (not Neit), who were honoured 
 as the parents of Osiris and sis, the two tute- 
 lary Deities. See Brugsch ‘ Geographische In- 
 schriften,’ vol. i. p. 255. Isis moreover was a 
 name commonly given to women, and most 
 likely to be borne by a daughter of Potiphera. 
 It is also to be remarked that there was a 
 close connection between Isis and Neith. Isis 
 was worshipped at Sais in the temple of 
 Neith, under the name As-ta-oert, Isis the 
 Great. See Brugsch, |. c., p. 245. ; 
 
 The connection of Joseph with this family 
 would seem to have had lasting and very 
 serious consequences. Asenath may, or may 
 not, have adopted her husband’s faith—pro- 
 bably she did so; but, like the wives of Jacob, 
 she may not have separated herself altogether 
 from her father’s influence, or have cast away 
 altogether the traditional superstitions of her 
 family. It is natural to refer the idolatry 
 of the Ephraimites to this origin. Mnevis, 
 the black bull, was worshipped at On as a 
 local Deity, the living representative of the 
 God Tum, the unseen principle and first cause 
 of all existence. 
 
 The question whether a priest of On 
 would be disposed to give his daughter to a 
 Hebrew, the favourite and prime minister of 
 Pharaoh, ought not to be regarded as a diffi- 
 culty. ‘There was nothing to create a scruple. 
 The worship of Jehovah was certainly not 
 known at that age to Egyptians in its ex- 
 clusive character. Foreigners, especially of 
 Semitic origin, were received with honour, 
 and raised to the highest rank by the greatest 
 sovereigns of the ancient Empire,’ and the de- 
 scendant of Abraham, who had been admitted 
 to the intimacy of a former Pharaoh, would be 
 acknowledged as of noble birth. ‘The circum- 
 cision of Joseph would bea strong recommen- 
 dation : it was a sign of consecration and purity 
 to which the Egyptian priests attached peculiar 
 importance. If the rite were previously 
 known as an Egyptian custom, more especially 
 in priestly and royal families, it would mark 
 Joseph both to Pharaoh and Potiphar as spe- 
 cially qualified for the alliance. If it were 
 previously unknown, no person was more 
 likely than Joseph to have introduced it 
 
 ® This curious fact is proved beyond all doubt 
 by the ‘Story of Saneha,’ a hieratic papyrus of 
 extreme antiquity, lately translated by Mr. 
 Goodwin. See especially pp. 39 and 43. It is 
 also to be observed that Saneha, Son of the 
 Sycomore, was a name probably given to the 
 foreigner on his adoption by the Egyptians, 
 
 ESSAY ON EGYPTIAN WORDS 
 
 ‘among the Egyptians; and this is possibly the 
 true solution of an acknowledged difficulty. 
 
 The first distinct representation of the rite is 
 found on a monument of the 19th dynasty, 
 long after the time of Joseph: two sons of 
 Rameses II. are pictured as undergoing it. 
 See M. Chabas’ art. in ‘Revue Archéo- 
 
 logique,’ 1861, p- 298. The word ? | > 
 
 “sabu” (which is translated “circumcise” by | 
 Champollion, and after him by Mr. Birch, 
 D.H.), is not found with that sense in any 
 ancient inscription.” A passage in the ‘ Funeral 
 Ritual’ (c. xvii. 1. 23, ed. Leps.) is supposed 
 by M. de Rougé to refer to circumcision, but 
 the meaning is very doubtful, nor if his ex- 
 planation were accepted, would it be con- 
 clusive: for although portions of the chapter 
 are undoubtedly older than Joseph, the 
 passage is a gloss of doubtful antiquity, and 
 is omitted in the ancient copy lately published 
 by M. Lepsius. See ‘ Aelteste Texte, Sarko- 
 phag 1 des Mentuhotep,’ pl. 1, 1. 16, 17. 
 
 Moy NIX 
 Zaphnath Paaneah.—Gen. xli. 45. 
 
 The history of the attempts to explain this 
 designation of Joseph is curious and instruc- 
 tive. The most natural process before the 
 hieroglyphic inscriptions were deciphered was 
 to compare the Hebrew form with the Cop- 
 tic: no explanation was derived from this 
 source which was generally satisfactory to 
 scholars, and most interpreters resorted to 
 the Septuagint, which gives several forms all 
 differing from the Hebrew. Gesenius holds 
 that the Hebrew writer must have modified 
 the Egyptian words in order to bring them 
 into accordance with his own language: a 
 singular assumption, since the word is com- 
 pletely inexplicable in Hebrew. It will be 
 found that an exact transcription of the 
 Hebrew letters gives a clear sense in Egyp- 
 tian. . 
 
 The word stands thus— 
 
 fad SPS" 2 Ent p anch. 
 
 10M. Brugsch gives no such meaning in his 
 dictionary. Mr. Goodwin adds, in the letter 
 lately received by me; the meaning adopted by 
 Birch from Champollion’s Dictionary is probably 
 
 based only on the Copic ce J, and is of little 
 authority. Ebers gives another word nf Ra , 
 
 or | i Sam » which he translates ‘‘ circum- 
 
 cise.” Brugsch and Birch have no such meaning, 
 nor do I find any example. A stronger but not 
 conclusive argument is drawn from the well- 
 known hieroglyphic for #¢. The representations, 
 however, to which Ebers alludes, and the mum- 
 mies which have been examined, are much later 
 than the time of Joseph. : 
 
PN ieee NATED Cr: 
 
 The letter / is invariably transcribed by 
 if or ane and most commoniy by the 
 
 latter. SX _ is the nearest form for), , 
 
 could only be represented in Hebrew by n3 
 or 3; and in the Pentateuch Q is gene- 
 ‘rally transcribed by nN, as in Pithom and 
 Asenath. No doubt can be _ entertained 
 about the remaining letters: all scholars 
 would accept the identification of the 
 Egyptian word here given with the Hebrew. 
 In fact every letter in this transcription 
 rests on the unanimous authority of Egyptian 
 scholars, and is confirmed by a vast number of 
 unmistakable words in ancient inscriptions 
 and papyri. 
 
 The meaning is quite clear. The first syllable 
 
 & Oe 
 zaf. isa word of ve common occur= 
 Ww ? Ty 
 
 rence, both in this simple form, and with ex- 
 planatory signs called determinatives, as a 
 “bushel,” or a “widgeon,” indicating abun- 
 dance." Its well-ascertained meaning is 
 “food,” especially “ corn,’ or “grain,” in 
 general. A few instances will show this usage, 
 and serve to illustrate the biblical account of 
 Joseph’s position. Under the early dynasties 
 of the ancient empire the officer of state who 
 received the tributes in kind and had the 
 superintendence of the public granaries bore 
 the title “master of the house of (‘zaf’ or 
 “zafa’) provisions.” M. de Rougé gives the 
 names of three officers who bore this title. 
 Ptah-ases, the son-in-law of a Pharaoh of 
 the 4th dynasty, Chafra or Chefren, was 
 called “mer set zafa,” which M. de Rougé 
 renders “chargé de la maison des pro- 
 visions de bouche.” ‘This remark on the 
 office is important, the more so since he 
 does not connect the word with the history 
 of Joseph. “Les tributs versés en nature 
 rendaient cette fonction trés importante, ainsi 
 qu’on peut le voir par l’histoire de Joseph.” ” 
 ‘The grandson and chief minister of Nepher- 
 kara bore the same title, l.c. p. 86. Another 
 great official of the same early age held the 
 three offices, master of the arsenals, of the 
 Treasury, and of the depots of provisions, 
 “zat.” De Rougé renders the last title, 
 ‘“‘ chef des lieux des offrandes, des denrées,” 
 p. 87. From the last passage it is also clear 
 that the granaries throughout Egypt were 
 under the superintendence of one great officer 
 of state. M. de Rougé observes, “ Ces trois 
 titres pouvaient constituer une sorte de minis- 
 tere des finances.” 
 
 The next word , “nt” is the prepo- 
 ? 
 
 11 This complete form is OX4 & oxy 
 
 The last twu signs are not phonetic ; they repre- 
 sent a widgeon or duck, and bread, 
 12 See ‘ Recherches,’ p. 69. 
 
 VoL.I. 
 
 ASI 
 
 sition “of,” used very commonly on the 
 early monuments. ‘Two examples may be 
 found in Egyptian words quoted by M. de 
 Rougé on the last passage which has been 
 discussed. 
 
 The meaning of “ Anch” is not questioned. 
 It signifies “life,” or with the article it may 
 mean “ the living.” Thus one name of Mem- 
 phis is ta-anch for the land of life or of the 
 living.!8 
 
 The meaning, therefore, of the whole name, 
 the only meaning which it could bear to an 
 Egyptian, and of course to a Hebrew of the 
 age of Moses, is “ the food of life” or “the 
 food of the living.” No question can be 
 raised as to the appropriateness of this desig- 
 nation: it only remains to show that the word 
 “zat” was likely to be applied to a person. 
 To this it is a complete answer that it occurs 
 in the rings of three Pharaohs of the 13th 
 dynasty. See Brugsch, ‘ Histoire d’Kgypte,’ 
 pl. vili., nos. 162, 164, and 167; or Lepsius, 
 * Konigsbuch,’ taf. xix. 282, 284.4  °- 
 
 We have now to consider the remarkable 
 reading of the Septuagint. The Egyptian was 
 a living language, though it had undergone 
 considerable modifications, when the Penta- 
 teuch was translated, and it is evident from 
 Jerome’s account that the Jews in Egypt 
 attached a definite meaning to the word 
 WovOon davnx, which on their authority he 
 renders salvator mundi. The latter part cor- 
 responds with the interpretation above given. 
 Life, or the living, is the equivalent of “the 
 world.” ‘The first part is more difficult to 
 explain. The transcription of yov@ would 
 
 give Bet I — (o), p-sont, ze. ‘foun- 
 
 dation.” It might possibly be used in the 
 sense of “support,” “sustentation;” but I 
 am not aware that any example of such a 
 meaning can be adduced.” 
 
 13 Jablonski, ‘Opuscula,’ tom. i. p. 210, sug- 
 gests from the Coptic suogy NTE MEME, 
 
 caput mundi; La Crozius, euoYy NTE 
 TLUO TT FA thus agreeing with the transcription 
 here given so far as the last part is concerned. 
 
 There can, however, be no doubt that Flas 
 
 represents }¥; whereas the phonetic value of 
 the Egyptian sign for head differs from it con- 
 siderably. 
 
 14 The transcription of Brugsch is more accu- 
 
 rate, ae VS - Traces of the word are 
 
 found in other rings, probably also in the name 
 of a Pharaoh of much earlier date. See De 
 Rougé, ‘ Recherches,’ p. 155. In choosing the 
 name, Pharaoh might possibly have had some 
 regard to the name Joseph; seph and zaph 
 bear a near resemblance. 
 
 18 Gesenius renders the word ‘‘the support of 
 life ;” but the imperfect knowledge of hiero- 
 
 HH 
 
482 
 
 Another transcription of the Greek form 
 may be suggested; one more exact, since it 
 retains the consonants without any modifi- 
 cation. 
 
 A] eG Ka j KE oO Psntmnanch. 
 
 The meaning would be “he who gives joy 
 to the world.” ‘This name has a strong 
 ‘Egyptian colouring. It occurs precisely in the 
 same form as that of a royal favourite under 
 
 the 5th dynasty, [| ne 5 x © sntm het, 
 
 or, as M. de Rougé reads, “‘senotem het,” 
 “ delighting the heart.” ‘The example shows, 
 also, that the construction is correct: ‘ seno- 
 tem” is a transitive form, and does not re- 
 quire or admit a preposition. It may be 
 ‘observed that the same root occurs in the 
 names of two princes of the 21st dynasty. 
 (See Brugsch, H. E., Pl. xiv., Nos. 299 and 
 302.) 
 
 One or other of these forms may have been 
 before the minds. of the Greek translator— 
 probably the latter; but the reading of the 
 ‘LXX is uncertain, and there is no reason what- 
 ever for departing from the simple, intelligible, 
 and well-ascertained sense of the words which 
 is elicited by transcription of the Hebrew. 
 
 238 
 
 This word, which Gesenius (Thes. s. wv.) 
 ‘calls “vox perdubia,” has never had a satis- 
 factory explanation. It is admitted to be 
 Egyptian, though, as usual, Gesenius supposes 
 that it was modified in the transcription in 
 order to give it a Hebrew character. The ex- 
 planation suggested by Rosellini, and adopted 
 by Gesenius, is ATLEPEXK, i.e. incline or bow 
 the head. ‘This, however, is inadmissible. The 
 transposition of the two words P€K and 
 ATE is rot in accordance with old Egyptian 
 usage. A&TLE may possibly be the true sound 
 
 of the hieroglyphic for head fy) (see De 
 
 glyphics in his time led him to the error of 
 me S 6 vs to which 
 it bears no real resemblance. I have since found 
 the name Sont-ur, ze. the ‘‘great foundation,” 
 as that of a high priest at Thebes. See Mariette, 
 ‘Fouilles,’ pl. vii. 1.12. The LX X. may therefore 
 have meant to represent Pa-sont-om-Paanch 
 (om=f ze. am, or ami), belonging to the support 
 of the world. A good sense, but not so good as 
 that given by the Hebrew’ Mr. Goodwin con- 
 siders the transcription of the LXX, which is 
 given above, to be very probable. He trans- 
 lates it ‘‘ making life pleasant,” which is equiva- 
 lent in meaning. He observes also that the 
 article in old Egyptian would not have been 
 written, but probably it was often supplied in 
 reading and speaking. ‘This applies to the pre- 
 ceding account of the Hebrew form. 
 
 identifying ‘‘sont”’ with 
 
 ESSAY ON EGYPTIAN WORDS 
 
 Rougé, ‘ Recherches,’ p. 91) n. 2.), but it would 
 not be correctly transcribed by ax. P€K is 
 
 not found in the sense “bow” or “incline” 
 in old Egyptian. ; : 
 
 setts . “Tt <> y 
 The exact transcription is A 
 
 If this give a meaning exactly applicable, 
 there can be no need of further inquiry. 
 
 The context tells us, not, as is commonly 
 assumed, that a herald went before Joseph, 
 addressing the people, but “they cried before 
 him,” z.e. the people or the attendants shouted 
 out with reference to Joseph, “ Abrek.” 
 
 But ab-rek is the imperative, and the em- 
 phatic imperative, of the verb “ Ab,” which is 
 a word specially used in reference to public 
 demonstrations of rejoicing. Thus, in an in- 
 scription of Rameses II. we find 4d-sen-nek, 
 “they rejoice before thee:” and in another of 
 later date, “the world is ina state of rejoicing,” 
 in 46 ni. ‘The termination “rek” is equiva- 
 lent to the Hebrew 45, as M. Chabas has 
 
 pointed out in explaining the word mai-rek, 
 ze. come.!® ‘ Voyage d'un Egyptien, p. 285. 
 
 The chief objection to this explanation is 
 that the verb is in the singular number, 
 addressing an individual, not a multitude. 
 But it seems quite natural that the attendants 
 should address Joseph, calling upon him to 
 rejoice, together with all the people, in his 
 deliverance and exaltation. Some support may 
 be found for this explanation in the fact that 
 subject princes address the Pharaoh in the 
 same form, hotep-rek. See the vignette to 
 the Stéle Pianchi in Mariette’s ‘ Fouilles 
 d’ Abydos.’ 
 
 Another transcription, which comes very 
 near to the Hebrew, would give Ab Rekh, 
 i.e. “pure” and “wise:” but it is unlikely to 
 have been used as an exclamation.” 
 
 nwo, Moses. 
 
 In examining the form which this name 
 would properly assume in Egyptian, we must 
 bear in mind the following points:—1. The 
 
 letter w is generally represented by (77] ze. 
 
 sh and its homophones, but in very ancient 
 transcriptions, and specially in monuments of 
 the 18th and r9th dynasties, it corresponds 
 
 in proper names to i, s. Thus we find 
 
 SLUT GI. Beta, shen 
 
 16 Tt is especially used in exclamations, thus : 
 harek—stand up, see ‘Br. D. H.’, p. $814, 
 equivalent to ‘‘up with you.” The form occurs 
 repeatedly in the texts. 
 
 17 Tn the ‘ 2g. Zeitschrift’ for 1869, p. 1869, 
 the Egyptian Ap-Rech, ie. Chief of the Wise. 
 The transcription is not accurate, p for b, and 
 ch for k. 
 
IN THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 | (\ foes ete ; Askelna, for opens, As- 
 
 ony or q. Pulistha, for 
 
 nw>p. M. Brugsch, a high authority in all 
 such questions, gives p or w as the corres- 
 
 \ (See 
 
 ‘ Geographische Inschriften,’ p. 15). This is 
 a point of importance, considering the remark- 
 able accuracy of the transcriptions in the 
 Pentateuch. 
 
 2. The final 
 
 represented by a vowel sound, either \\ =i, 
 
 kalon, and 
 
 ponding letters to the Egyptian 
 
 letter 4 is adequately 
 
 or more commonly by > u, corresponding 
 
 to the Hebrew }. 
 
 3. The vowel sound in Mo is not repre- 
 sented either in Hebrew or Egyptian, but in 
 the transcription a preference should be given 
 to the vowel o, which appears from Coptic 
 and Greek to be associated with the con- 
 sonants Ms. 
 
 4. It is also to be observed that Moses 
 undoubtedly lays the stress on the verb “ draw 
 out;” not on the noun “water.” The name 
 in Egyptian ought to bear the sense “ drawn 
 out,” “brought forth.” ‘The verb may have 
 borne the same sense in Hebrew also (a fact 
 of extremely common occurrence), but if the 
 writer knew Egyptian he certainly would not 
 have chosen a word for which that language 
 does not supply a natural interpretation. 
 
 Among transcriptions which are probable 
 or possible, one exactly fulfils all these condi- 
 
 tions. The word ih ('% ms u, unquestion- 
 
 ably corresponds in form to the Hebrew, 
 letter for letter, on the principles laid down 
 above. The vowel sound, which is required 
 for the first syllable, may be assumed to have 
 been 0, and this for several reasons, ‘The 
 
 syllable i! occurs in many names of the 
 
 18th dynasty, and is always transcribed by 
 Manetho or his Greek translators by mos ; 
 thus we find Amosis and Thotmosis. 
 
 The question of equal importance as to the 
 meaning remains to be answered. 
 
 The explanation, suggested first as it would 
 seem by Gesenius (Thes. s. v.) “child” or 
 “son,” is quite accurate so far as it goes. 
 Mesu, or Moses, undoubtedly does bear that 
 signification, and may be rendered exactly by 
 “son.” But if we had no other information 
 as to the original and common sense of the 
 verb from which it is derived, this interpreta- 
 tion, which contradicts the statement in Exo- 
 dus, would present an insuperable difficulty, 
 unless we were satisfied with the usual evasion 
 that the word was altered so as to adapt it to 
 a Hebrew etymology. The difficulty, how- 
 ever, is entirely removed when the original 
 
 483 
 meaning, as well as usage, of the word. in 
 Egyptian is examined. In his ‘ Hieroglyphic 
 Dictionary’ M. Brugsch shows that the sense 
 “ drawing out” isthe original one. It is taken 
 from the work of the potter (p. 705). It there 
 means “ produce,” “bring forth,” and, as M. 
 Brugsch affirms in another passage (p. 698), 
 the derivation of MWD from the Hebrew root 
 mw, traxit, extraxit, suitably also in the sense 
 “extraxit e ventre matris,’ would preserve 
 the true sense of the Egyptian." 
 
 The word used by Moses may of course 
 be Semitic; although it must be observed that 
 it, occurs only in this passage, and in one 
 other which is evidently taken from it, Ps. 
 xviii. 17 (repeated 2 Sam. xxii. 17); but at 
 any rate it is so exceedingly rare that we can 
 best account for its selection by Moses by the 
 supposition that it came exceedingly near to, 
 or exactly represented, the Egyptian. It is 
 far from improbable that it was, in fact, a 
 simple transcription of words, which must 
 have been perfectly intelligible to the Israelites 
 of that age. What the Egyptian princess 
 said—and her words were not likely to be 
 forgotten or misrepresented by her adopted 
 son—was this: “I give him the name Moses 
 —‘brought forth’—because I brought him 
 forth from the water.” 
 
 The probability that this was actually the 
 Egyptian name of Moses comes very near a 
 certainty when we learn that it was very com- 
 mon under the Middle Empire. In the se- 
 lect papyri (Anastasi, vi. p. 3, 1. 4)? it occurs 
 as the names of a keeper of goats, the super- 
 intendent of the “ house of measures,” where 
 corn was measured or weighed. It was also 
 borne by a prince of the blood-royal of Egypt 
 who held the office of Viceroy of Nubia 
 under the nineteenth dynasty. There is no 
 reason for identifying either of these persons 
 with Moses, but the coincidences with the 
 biblical history and with the legends in Jose- 
 phusand other writers are curious. This ascer- 
 tained use of the word appears to give it a 
 very decided preference over two other senses 
 suggested by a faithful transcription. The 
 
 18 A family of words closely resembling, or 
 identical with, MW1D NW, is found in Egyptian. 
 
 See Brugseh D. H., p. 711, 5. v- in qu 
 
 19 In the Egyptian the translation would run 
 thus : 
 
 1$fs Fes = Oh 
 eg Ns 
 PAA yh atc 
 
 Au set hi tat naf pa ran Mesu em tat pe-un 
 
 mesna su emta pa mu. 
 
 20 See Brugsch, D. H., p. 1162. 
 
 HH2 
 
484 
 vord j i.e. masi, in the sense 
 wor aN FS A te : 
 
 “to bring,” is common, not only as the in- 
 stances given by Birch and Brugsch would 
 lead us to suppose, in reference to tributes, 
 but to the simple transfer of objects. It 
 would be quite intelligible in Egyptian were 
 we to read, “She called his name Masi, saying 
 because I brought (miasi) him out of the 
 waters.” It is, however, doubtful whether 
 such a proper name would be in accordance 
 with Egyptian usage. Again, it might be 
 possible, with our present knowledge of Egyp- 
 tian, to give a more plausible etymology de- 
 rived from the word “ water,” than either of 
 those which Jablonski and other scholars 
 formerly proposed. ‘The phonetic value of 
 
 the group is admitted to be Mn, or 
 
 Mo, and tw4 ff A shi, denotes a child, 
 
 Mo-shi, a water-child, would not be an im- 
 possible transcription or rendering, were it 
 justified by Egyptian usage. Still it is clear 
 that the stress is laid, not on the noun, but 
 on the verb, and there appears no reason to 
 depart from the simple and natural explana- 
 tion which has been given above. 
 
 It may, however, appear to require some 
 additional evidence that Moses should have 
 used an Egyptian word, or have selected, to 
 say the least, a very unusual Hebrew word to 
 represent it. Here wemay call attention to a 
 fact which has hitherto been unnoticed. In 
 that part of the narrative which deals specially 
 with Egyptian matters, words are constantly 
 used which are either of Egyptian origin or 
 common to Hebrew and Egyptian. ‘The 
 following instances are taken from one verse, 
 that in which Moses gives the history of his 
 exposure. His mother made him an ark of 
 bulrushes. The word “ark,” 3M (of which 
 Réodiger says, “ falsi sunt, qui etymon in lin- 
 guis Semiticis quererent), is admitted to be 
 Egyptian. It is, indeed, very common in the 
 sense “ chest” or “ coffer,” also in the sense 
 
 Euctacie,” Oo ins ‘ae teb, with several 
 
 variants. (Birch D.N., p. 5359; Br. D.H., 
 1628.) The Septuagint retains the Hebrew 
 OB, doubtless as a well-known Egyptian 
 word. The material of which this ark 
 was made is called 853. Brugsch(‘ Dict. 
 Hier.,’ p. 145) identifies this word with 
 
 the Coptic KA RR, “juncus quo fiunt funes.” 
 Brugsch shows, moreover, that it was specially 
 used for making the light boats of the Nile. 
 
 71 Tt is used for bringing a harp to a man ina 
 tavern. See ‘Stele Pianchi ap, Brugsch, D. H.’, 
 p. 157. Brugsch writes the word Masib, but 
 Birch gives Masi, which seems correct. The leg 
 is not phonetic, but determinative. 
 
 ESSAY ON EGYPTIAN WORDS 
 
 He gives the word Re K222, papy- 
 
 rus myopea, p. 1452. See also p. 2320, 
 where a basket of green papyrus (kam nat) 
 is mentioned. 
 
 Again, “ when she made it, she daubed it 
 with slime.” The word 5M is used in the 
 original both for the process and the material. 
 This corresponds exactly with the original 
 meaning and use of the Egyptian word 
 
 . ; Sie: which has the same letters, though, 
 
 as is very commonly the case, in a different 
 order. ‘The Hebrew is ch-m-r, the Egyp- 
 tian m-r-ch. Brugsch (‘ Dict. Hier., p. 769) 
 says, “ Die Grundbedeutung der Wurzel Merh 
 ist ‘ beschmieren, bestreichen, tiberzeichen et- 
 was mit einem feuchten gegenstande.” Mr. 
 Goodwin has very lately shown the identity 
 of the words. ‘The root appears again in 
 2LRDHD E> 22.8 pe ©,\, bitumen, pitch, 
 in Hebrew “Wn.” —‘ Zeits.,’ 1867, p. 86: 
 Whether Moses had this word in mind may, 
 of course, be questioned, but it is evidently 
 the most suitable that could be suggested. 
 The next word, “pitch,” is common to 
 
 Hebrew and Egyptian. Nt, RE or 
 fete. sft. The Egyptian word is very 
 
 common; the Hebrew occurs only twice in 
 the Bible, but is well known in Arabic, and was 
 probably common to Egyptian and Hebrew. 
 Jochebed then placed the ark in “ the flags.” 
 The Hebrew is 51D, for which no plausible 
 etymology has been suggested, nor is the word 
 found in any Semitic language. It answers, 
 however, very nearly to the Egyptian name 
 for a species of papyrus found in marshy 
 places and on the banks of rivers. The 
 
 word was written either % Pi iy Ug 4 4 
 (Sallier, 1, 4, 9), ze., tufi, or => Cie ue 
 
 also to be read “tufi.” The Coptic equivalent 
 
 is XOOC], which indicates a predominance of 
 the sibilant sound common to dentals. It 
 seems probable that it was also written with 
 
 Ne , “z,” both because of the Coptic form, 
 and because Peeclir , “tzet” (which seems 
 
 to be an abbreviation), also means papyrus. 
 In that case “tufi” would be translated 
 “zufi” = h1p. The identification of the 
 Egyptian and Hebrew is so probable as to 
 approximate to a certainty, In the last num- 
 ber of Brugsch’s Dictionary, published since 
 this was printed, I find that he also identifies 
 tufi, XOO’S¢ and 41D, p. 1580. 
 
 Lastly, we read “ by the river’s brink.” 
 "on np Sy. The form and meaning are 
 Egyptian. It is well known that %N’ is 
 
IN: THE PENTATEUCH, 
 
 Egyptian. The Nile has two names: the sa- 
 cred name Hapi, and the common name, 
 meaning “ river,” which is here exactly tran- 
 
 ned —~—~ Aor. Theword nay, 
 
 ? 
 
 i. e. “lip,” for “ brink,” is sufficiently common 
 in Hebrew, but it is interesting to find in a 
 papyrus of the r9th dynasty precisely the same 
 word with the same meaning. “Isat down by 
 
 , ; —a 1a sn =” 
 the /ip of the river, lems, cia, 
 i.e. “spot Atur.” Atur is another form of 
 “ Aor.’ The same idiom occurs in the 
 ‘ Funeral Ritual,’ c. il. 3, 1. 2. 
 
 It would be very difficult to resist the im- 
 pression that this verse was written by a man 
 equally familiar with both languages, or, on 
 the other hand, to admit the possibility that 
 coincidences coming so near together were 
 purely accidental, as they must have been in 
 the mouth of.a Palestinian Jew. 
 
 One more instance of equal interest is taken 
 from the 1st chapter of Exodus, ver. 11. We 
 there read that the Egyptians set psn "t, 
 “sari massim,” over Israel. ‘The words are 
 both common in Hebrew, but they are also 
 common in Egyptian, and precisely in the 
 
 —— 
 
 —H— > 
 mis, tribute. ‘ Dictionary of Hieroglyphics,’ 
 s.v. The official name “ser” is still more 
 striking. It is common in the sense “chief- 
 tain,” but we find it specially applied to the 
 officer appointed by ‘Tothmosis III. to su- 
 perintend the work of captives employed in 
 making bricks. In the inscription on the 
 well-known picture which represents the pro- 
 cesses, we find the proper official designation 
 of the overseers,” who were armed with 
 heavy whips, and also of the chief superintend- 
 
 23 
 ent. He iscalled —¥— Ny of which the 
 — » 
 
 Hebrew “vw, “ser,” is the exact transcription. 
 His rank is denoted by the long staff, and 
 by the determinative, viz. the head and neck 
 of a giraffe. Had this title occurred first 
 under the roth dynasty it might have been 
 regarded as Semitic (for a vast number of 
 military and civil titles were then introduced 
 into Egypt); but occurring, as it does, under 
 the 18th dynasty, it is unquestionably Egyp- 
 tian. It is found, indeed, in inscriptions far 
 more ancient, e.g. under Pepi of the 6th 
 dynasty. See De Rougé, ‘Recherches,’ p. 
 118. We have, in any case, a proof that in 
 relating Egyptian transactions Moses either 
 used the native Egyptian word, or that he 
 
 22 Ca j 
 AY SS. mit! The meaning of the 
 
 group is the head work-givers, the eye denot- 
 ing superintendence. 
 
 23 In the eleventh line of the inscription, which 
 is read from right to left. See Brugsch, ‘ His- 
 toire d’ Egypte,’ p. 106. 
 
 scribed 
 
 same signification, Birch gives 
 
 485 
 
 adopted the Hebrew word which expressed it 
 most exactly both in meaning and form. 
 
 DNS, Pithom. This city was formerly 
 identified by Brugsch with the fort of Djar, 
 Pachtum n Zar. ‘This was a point of im- 
 portance, since it is certain that that fort or 
 city was in existence early in the 18th dynasty, 
 before the accession of ‘Tothmosis III., the 
 grandson of Amosis I., to whom its erection 
 may be unhesitatingly ascribed. ‘The fortress 
 in question is shown, on grounds which ap- 
 pear conclusive, to have been known at a later 
 period by the name Heroopolis, near the ruins 
 of Mukfar, or Abn Kasheb. See Brugsch, 
 ‘ Geographie des Alten Agyptens,’ p. 263. 
 The word Pithom, however, does not corre- 
 spond to the Egyptian form with sufficient 
 accuracy, and it is now admitted to be iden- 
 
 tical with yy 9 ", Pe-tum, the 
 
 house, 7. e. dwelling or temple of Tum. Still 
 the conclusions drawn by Brugsch do not 
 lose their interest, since it has lately been 
 shown that this place was in the immediate 
 vicinity of the fortress, and was in all proba- 
 bility built at the same time as the adjoin- 
 ing sanctuary, giving name to the whole set 
 of edifices, or it might have been a second 
 name of the same place. Thus On is called 
 Pitum, with the same meaning, “ house of 
 Tum.” This is probably the true explana- 
 tion. The passage translated by M. Chabas, 
 
 ‘Mét. Egypt., ii, p. 155, shows that certain 
 nomads of Atema (or, as the name should be 
 transcribed, Edom) applied to the guards of 
 Merneptah Hotephima, the son of Rameses, 
 for permission to feed their cattle in the dis- 
 trict adjoining the fortress, to which that so- 
 vereign had then given his own name. The 
 place of conference was the great reservoir at 
 Pithom. From this we learn that Pithom was 
 on the frontier of the desert. ‘Fhe name here 
 used for reservoir in the papyrus is Semi- 
 
 tic, | TRIS Es Chabas 
 
 transcribes it Bere-koavota, 7.e. M\3D"3, cis- 
 terns or reservoirs: a curious illustration of 
 the biblical narrative, built as the place was 
 by Israelites, and probably occupied by them 
 up to the date of the Exodus. In the time 
 of Merneptah there is no indication of their 
 presence, nor is it at all probable that had the 
 Delta at that time been in the state supposed 
 by Brugsch (see ‘ Histoire d Egypte, p. 174), 
 the king would have admitted a nomad tribe 
 into the district. 
 
 DNs, Etham. Exod. xiii. 20. The tran- 
 scription of this name comes exceedingly 
 
 : <—>—) EY 
 near to Pithom. aw 3 God , A-tum, 
 
 a $ . . 
 | ee Pitum. The meaning is 
 ? 
 
486 
 
 identical, ~Aeg ie. A,and aT. per, mean 
 
 “house,” “dwelling,” and are applied indif- 
 ferently as designations of one and the same 
 locality: thus Pi Ramessu and A-Ramessu 
 (Chab., ‘ Mél. Eg.”) Etham and Pithom are to 
 be rendered “house of Tum.” ‘The site of 
 Etham was on the extreme border of the 
 desert, such, as we have seen, must have been 
 the site of Pithom. ‘The identification of the 
 two names which M. Chabas (‘ Voy. Eg.,’ 
 p. 286) proposes as probable, may therefore 
 be regarded as all but certain. The LXX. 
 give ‘Od, or ’O@ap, for Etham. This repre- 
 
 sents the Egyptian exactly, for the >—~ 
 
 corresponds generally to O. In Numbers 
 XXXlii. 6, 7, they give Bov@ay, or, as it should 
 be read, BovOay. The Bov, as in the well- 
 known Busiris for Pe-bsiri, represents the 
 
 Egyptian €)4 (not the article, but the group 
 
 for “house” or Pe): this corroborates the 
 argument for the identification. 
 
 The derivation proposed by Jablonski, and 
 accepted by Forster, viz. At-iom, nof-sea, may 
 illustrate the shifts to which men of learning 
 were formerly driven by their ignorance of 
 the ancient language of Egypt. 
 
 ' DdDNY,. Gen. xlvil. 11; DDMOYI, Exod. 1. 11. 
 In the former passage the name “ Rameses” 
 that of a district; 
 it is the name ofa city. ‘The pointing of the 
 former name is preferable. The first syllable 
 
 37 is the exact transcription of <— Ra, the 
 
 well-known name of the Sun-God. The 
 second part of the word, ppv, represents with 
 
 equal fidelity the Egyptian in ' fl « meses.” 
 This latter part is a reduplicated form of the 
 es,” a child. It 
 
 occurs in the name Rameses, which was borne 
 by two Pharaohs of the 19th, and by all the 
 kings of the 2oth dynasty. In the name of 
 the sovereign the meaning of the word is either 
 “ Ra begat,” or “ Ra begat him.” Hence it is 
 inferred that the name both of the district 
 and of the city must have been derived from 
 that of the king. 
 
 It is, however, clear that the ats of the 
 Pentateuch represents the name as that of 
 the district at the time of its occupation by the 
 Israelites, that is, at a time admitted by all to 
 be ages before the 19th dynasty. Had the pas- 
 sage in Genesis occurred in a papyrus of the 
 age of the Exodus, it would have been held as 
 a sufficient proof that the name must have been 
 ancient; nor is there any reason to doubt the 
 statement, or to suppose that the name was 
 simply given as that by which the district was 
 known at the time when Moses wrote. ‘The 
 only question is whether it was a name likely 
 
 very common word 
 
 in the latter, “ Raamses,” © 
 
 ESSAY ON EGYPTIAN WORDS 
 
 to be given to a place or district at an early 
 age, in accordance with Egyptian usage. 
 
 Late researches have shown that “ Ra,” the 
 first part of the word, entered very commonly. 
 into names of places, districts, and cities under 
 the ancient empire: far more commonly than 
 at a later period. Thus we find, from in- 
 scriptions in the tomb of Tei (son-in-law of a 
 Pharaoh of the 5th dynasty, An, or Ranuser), 
 that not less than four cities, or districts, in 
 his government were called Ra-asket, Ra- 
 shephet, Ra-Seket, and Ra-hotep (De Rougé, 
 ‘Recherches, p. 94; see also p. 72, where 
 M. de R. observes that the frequent notices 
 of Ra have been much overlooked). Under a 
 preceding Pharaoh we meet with Ra-heb, i.e., 
 festival of Ra; this was a royal residence. 
 Such names might be expected to be found 
 very frequently in the country about On, 
 which was called Pe-Ra, Es-Ra, Nes-Ra, and 
 Aa-Ra. (See Brugsch, ‘Geog. Nos. 1213, 
 1214.) 
 
 Ra-meses may therefore well have been 
 the old name of the district: whether it 
 represents the original form, “ Ra-messon,” 
 with the sense “Ra the self-begetting,” an 
 ancient appellation of Ra in the Ritual; or 
 Ra-meses, “Ra the creator, former, or be- 
 gotten,” a sense equally suitable and harmo- 
 nizing with Egyptian notions; or “ Ra-mesu,” 
 children of Ra. The Egyptians called them- 
 selves children of Ra, z.¢., Ra-mesu, from the 
 earliest times ; it was probably their character= 
 istic name as distinguished from foreigners: 
 this appears from a well-known inscription on 
 the tomb of Seti Merneptah, the father of 
 Rameses II. A city, of which the site is 
 unknown, bore the name Mis-Ra:* nor is it 
 at all improbable that this is connected with 
 the name given to the Egyptians in the Bible, 
 viz , Mizraim.””. That some district should 
 have borne the name, and, if any district, that 
 which was peculiarly associated with the 
 earliest forms of Sun worship, presents no 
 improbability,** nothing which can justify us 
 in questioning the accuracy of Moses. 
 
 ‘The same arguments apply tothe name of the 
 city of Rameses. It was a name very naturally 
 given to the capital of the district. The certain 
 fact that Rameses II. gave his own name to a 
 fortress of considerable extent in this district, 
 as well as to others in different parts of Egypt, 
 has been regarded by. Egyptologers as a 
 
 24 See Brugsch, * Geog.,’ No. 1517. 
 
 *° This has been suggested by M. Rouge- 
 mont, ‘Age de Bronze,’ and is supported “by 
 M. Rheinisch. Dr. Ebers rejects, but does not 
 disprove, the identification. In an Essay lately 
 published by Mr. Birch, on the trilingual in- 
 scription of San, he observes that Mizraim is 
 supposed by some to represent the common 
 Egyptian word for Egypt, viz. ta-meri. This 
 requires two transpositions, mer-ta and met-ra. 
 
 6 This is, in fact, admitted even by M. Chabas, 
 ‘Mel. égypt.,’ ii. p. 125. 
 
PNerl ti feet oN Lay ERG GE 
 
 ‘conclusive proof that it could not have borne 
 the name previously. It should, however, be 
 observed that Moses does not call the city, 
 or arsenal, Pi Ramessu, but simply Rameses. 
 The word Pi, or its equivalent 4, signifying 
 house or residence, so far as I can ascertain, 
 is never omitted in the Egyptian designations 
 of places named after the king. It is found 
 in all the names given by M. Chabas, ‘ Mél. 
 Kg., ii. p. 126. It is extremely unlikely that 
 it should have been omitted by Moses in the 
 very same sentence in which he gives the full 
 ‘and accurate transcription of Pithom. Again, 
 ‘the name which the fortress bore after its 
 enlargement by Rameses was invariably that 
 of the Sovereign, who is not called in Egyptian 
 documents Rameses simply, but Rameses 
 Meiamon, or Meramon. ‘This is not con- 
 clusive, but it adds some weight to the argu- 
 ‘ment. It is known, moreover, that the fortress 
 -was in existence at the beginning of the reign 
 of Rameses, and apparently bearing the name 
 Rameses.2’ In addition to these facts we find 
 that Amosis, or Aahmes, to whom the build- 
 ing of several cities in the Delta is attributed 
 by contemporary monuments, gave the name 
 “Rames” to one of his own sons. It has 
 been observed above, that in the names 
 of early kings, the Greeks transcribe Mes 
 by Moses, which points to a duplicate s 
 in Egyptian. It may not be assumed that 
 the name of the city was taken from this 
 prince, but the probability that the same, or 
 that a similar name should be given to both at 
 the same time, is sufficiently obvious. It may 
 be added that Ramesses was likely to be the 
 true name of one of the treasure cities built 
 by Aahmes, because the king was a restorer 
 of the worship of Ra. He wasa great builder, 
 and had special reasons for fortifying the East- 
 ern district, which previously bore the name 
 Rameses. It is also certain that Egyptian 
 cities often took their name from a district, 
 in which case the prefix “ Pi” is not used * 
 
 One argument of great weight remains to 
 be considered. The city of Rameses Meiamon, 
 with its parks, lakes, and the whole adjoining 
 district, was the centre of a great Egyptian 
 population, a place of festivities ; whereas, at 
 the time described in the Pentateuch, the two 
 fortresses built by the Israelites were in the 
 district which they occupied, and of which there 
 is no indication whatever that they were 
 dispossessed. In the time of Rameses it 
 was a rich, fertile, and beautiful district, 
 described as the abode of happiness, where 
 
 27 Brugsch, ‘ Histoire d’Egypte,’ p. 156. ‘‘ Les 
 papyrus mentionnent ces deux endroits existants 
 déjz sous Sethos I. par leurs noms égyptiens.” 
 
 28 Thus the fortress of Zar is found without the 
 prefix in numerous inscriptions. See Brugsch, 
 “Geog.,’ p. 260, and Nos. 1263, 1267, taf. xlvii. 
 Dr. Haigh suggests that a synonym of Zar may 
 be read Ka-sen, or Kashen; but his arguments 
 are not very satisfactory. See ‘Zeits.’ 1861, 
 
 p- 47- 
 
 487 
 
 all alike, rich and poor, lived in peace and 
 plenty ; but in the time of Moses it was the 
 abode of a suffering race, resounding not with 
 the jubilant shouts of Egyptians, but with the 
 groans and execrations of an oppressed popu- 
 lation. A stronger contrast’ can scarcely be 
 drawn than that of the state of the district at 
 the Exodus and that which it presented under 
 Rameses II. and his successors. 
 
 nvnp, Pihahiroth. It is not certain 
 
 that the word is Egyptian. If so, it may, 
 like some other names, have been adopted 
 and modified either by the Israelites or other 
 Semitic occupants of the district. There 
 appear to be indications of the name in one 
 of the Select Papyri (Anast. ili. 1, 2), in 
 which the scribe Penbesa gives an account 
 of a visit of Rameses to the adjoining dis- 
 trict. The passage is translated by M. 
 Chabas, ‘ Mél. Egypt.,’ ii. p. 133. Garlands 
 of flowers were sent from a place called 
 
 ER mcaeed 80 : 
 BN Se. Pehir: from the de- 
 
 terminatives, it appears that the place was 
 on a river or reservoir. Chabas, however, 
 Sh Sins 
 connects the word wu. o> = “hir, 
 with the Hebrew 7)n. We may, there- 
 fore, translate Pihahiroth (regarding it as 
 partly Egyptian, partly Semitic) “the house 
 of wells, the watering-place in the desert.” 
 M. Brugsch, however, compares Pihahiroth 
 with the name of a place called “ Pehuret,” 
 but of which nothing is known. ‘ Geog.,’ p. 
 298. 
 
 wa, There can be no doubt that this name 
 is Egyptian, although, as the Israelites occupied 
 the district during the whole period of their 
 sojourn, the form may have been modified. 
 No probable interpretation is supplied by the 
 Coptic, nor does any name exactly corres- 
 ponding to Goshen appear on the monuments. 
 It is, however, to be remarked that three 
 Egyptian nomes, situate in the Delta, and 
 extending over great part of the district of 
 Goshen, bore each a name beginning with the 
 word Ka, i.e. a bull. This word would be 
 represented in Hebrew by the first syllable 
 of Goshen. The Egyptian for bull is written 
 
 either with ]_J or Z) (see Birch, D. H., p. 
 
 417, OD a ane ,ga), and the regular tran- 
 
 scription of 7\ (LJ being a homophone) 
 
 is 3, g. The vowel sound is vague, but 
 the Greek transcription of Ka-kem is 
 koxopun. See Brugsch, * Geographie, Index. 
 We may accept “go” as the transcription of 
 the first syllable without any hesitation. That 
 of the second remains doubtful. 
 
 If, again, we can depend upon the transcrip- 
 tion of M. Brugsch, the name of the rath 
 
488 
 
 nomos in Lower Egypt was Ka-she, of which 
 
 the Hebrew transcription would be y7wy. 
 ‘This comes exceedingly near to the form now 
 in question. The Egyptian ideographs to 
 which Brugsch gives this phonetic value, 
 represent a bull and a leaping calf.” See 
 Brugsch, ‘ Geographie des Alten A‘gyptens,’ 
 p. 253. The name of the principal city in 
 the district was She-nefer, ze. “the sacred 
 calf,” a name which has an obvious and 
 striking bearing upon the history of the 
 Israelites. From another notice it is proved 
 that this city, Neter-she, was situate in a dis- 
 trict adjoining that of which Zar was the 
 capital. But Zar, or, as it is written more 
 fully, “the fortress of Zar,’ was close to 
 Pithom, and was formerly identified with it 
 by Brugsch. So that there is sufficient reason 
 to assume that the Egyptian name of the 
 district may have been pronounced Goshe. 
 It is of course possible that the name Goshen 
 may have represented to the Israelites an 
 adjoining district beginning with the word 
 Ka; or that some name even nearer than 
 “Goshe” may have been in use. Ka-kem, 
 i.e. the black bull, appears to have been the 
 
 origin of the LXX. and Coptic KECE RR. 
 The monumental inscriptions in Lower Egypt 
 are scanty. 
 
 The bull represented in the names of these 
 districts was Mnevis, worshipped specially at 
 On as the living representative of Tum, the 
 unknown principle and source of all existence. 
 See Brugsch, /. c. 
 
 ov3. Gershom. Moses explains this name 
 to mean a sojourner in a strange land, Exodus 
 ii. 22. Gesenius finding no Hebrew authaiity 
 for this meaning of pw, assumes a double 
 error, viz. that the writer took py, “there,” 
 
 29 The leaping calf is the D. of 4d, ‘‘ thirst.” 
 I do not find the value assigned to it by Brugsch. 
 
 ESSAY ON EGYPTIAN WORDS 
 
 to be the equivalent of a strange land, and 
 that he was ignorant of the true derivation 
 
 from W73, banished. ‘The Egyptian gives a 
 
 complete etymology. ‘T-he first syllable is 
 common to both languages: 43 is the exact — 
 
 equivalent and transcription of & ‘a pi 
 or & f » dweller, or sojourner. ‘The 
 
 word is preserved in Coptic in the form 
 
 XUOIAYS, inwhich x = Q\ and A= we 
 Moses, as we have seen, usually takes a word 
 common to both languages. * The second 
 syllable nw is pure Egyptian, retained in the,“ 
 
 Coptic in the common word CYELRLKO, — 
 shemmo, a foreigner, or a foreign land. Thus 
 in this passage the Coptic version of 7933 y US; 
 
 a foreign land, is OT K& OI MMERLRRO. 
 
 The meaning toan Egyptian would be exactly 
 what the Hebrew expresses “a dweller in a 
 foreign land.” The Coptic, according to 
 Brugsch, D. H., is the equivalent of 
 “shumer,” a bow, used commonly as the 
 hieroglyphic of “ foreigners.” 
 
 Genesis xli. 2, nx, LXX. dyer, Coptic 
 & CI. The word has long been recognised 
 as Egyptian. It occurs only in this passage and 
 in Job viii. 11, where it is used in parallelism 
 with Nj (see above, p. 485), and described as 
 a water plant. The old Egyptian corresponds 
 
 exactly, lola, as a verb to be 
 
 green, to grow and flower. The determinative - 
 points to herbage by a stream. Another form 
 
 of the word BRL axu, is used for 
 d ? 
 
 reeds, rushes, &c. The radical meaning is 
 bright luxuriant growth. 
 
 In the Introduction to Exodus the atten- 
 tion of scholars was specially called to a list 
 of words taken from the first fifteen chapters 
 of Exodus, which contain the history of 
 the transactions in Egypt. ‘They are either 
 dma& heyoweva, or peculiar to the Pentateuch, 
 occurring, if at all elsewhere, only in the 
 Psalms of later date, which recapitulate the his- 
 tory. Nearly all are words which are found in 
 Egyptian documents of unquestioned antiquity, 
 either older or not much later than Moses. 
 
 C. i. 7. yow. In Pentateuch only, 
 except in Psalm cv., taken from this pas- 
 sage, the root is found in Arabic and Athio- 
 
 The Egyptian Pex s written with 
 
 pic. 
 all the dentals, e. g., with oN » which is 
 
 the exact equivalent of ¥." It exactly corre- 
 
 1 Thus de Rougé, Chr. p. 103. Br. D. Hus. v. 
 
 sponds to the #thiopian ZR, pullulavit; 
 
 the ‘i 
 
 valent to Hiphil. This accounts for pow 
 being followed by the objective of the object 
 produced. 
 
 75, not an uncommon word, but far more 
 frequently found in the Pentateuch (nineteen 
 times) than elsewhere (eleven times alto- 
 gether): the Eg. root is per, ze, come 
 forth, grow abundantly, corn and all kinds of 
 grain. 
 
 II. D'DD MY, see above, p. 486. 
 
 13. JIH2 occurs once only, Ez. xxxiv. 4, 
 out of the Pent. 
 
 16. o3NNn, the two stones. The 
 meaning is purely conjectural; there is no 
 trace of the expression in Hebrew, or of the 
 usage to which it is supposed to refer in 
 
 The root A, ben, is found 
 aoe” 
 
 represents the impulsive mood, equi- 
 
 Palestine. 
 
e- 
 
 In. Egyptian, see above. 
 ~ known as Egyptian. 
 
 IN; THE: PENTATEUCH. 
 
 in many derivatives in Egyptian; it has the 
 sense to roll, twist, turn, &c.; also to pro- 
 duce, engender. Brugsch connects it with 
 jp. Possibly it may have some connexion 
 with the very doubtful Hebrew. 
 
 C. il. 3. AN, ark. 27 times in the Pen- 
 tateuch, not found elsewhere. It is only 
 used of the ark of Noah, and of the cradle of 
 Moses. It has no Semitic root or equiva- 
 lent, the Arabic being derived entirely from 
 this passage. In Egyptian it is a common 
 word in the sense of chest, coffer, and cradle. 
 
 193, a word found in Job and Isaiah; but 
 from Egyptian, see above. 
 
 npr, pitch, occurs twice only out of Pen- 
 tateuch, Isaiah xxxiv. 9; xxxv. 9: common 
 “IN’, the Nile, long 
 
 5. YT, wash, a common word, but used 
 in Egyptian rakat, and recht in the same 
 sense. 
 
 Io. mv, “to draw forth,’ only here 
 and in the 18th Psalm; no satisfactory ety- 
 mology in Semitic, but common in the form 
 mesu, and with variants in the sense bring 
 forth, draw forth, &c. See above. 
 
 16. O17, once only in Cant. i. 17. 
 
 lil, 2. 73D, only in Exodus and Deut.; 
 shown in note ad /oc. to be Egyptian in the 
 sense “ thorny acacia.” 
 
 7. jan, straw, common in the Pen- 
 tateuch, rare elsewhere. In Egyptian tebn 
 Seeman cnat,. Pap: Sall; 4, .p. 5. OP, 
 stalk, not uncommon in Hebrew, but 
 Egyptian in exactly the same form and 
 
 ‘sense. 
 
 9. nyw, look to, trust in; very rare in this 
 sense. sy) occurs nine times in Pent., thirty 
 times in Job, very rare in later books. 
 
 vi. 25. The father-in-law and the son of 
 Eleazer both bear Egyptian names, Putiel, 
 “devoted to El.” Phineas occurs under 
 Rameses II. 
 
 vii. 3. On the names of magicians and 
 sorcerers see note on this chapter, at the end. 
 
 pnd, d. X., and y. 22, nd, correspond to 
 Egyptian words for magic and medical 
 formule. 
 
 27. YNIDY, zeparda, frog; only found in 
 Exodus and in one Psalm taken from it. It 
 is a purely local name, adopted by the Arabs 
 in Egypt. The radicals of which it is com- 
 posed occur in a modified form in the 
 Egyptian for “tadpole,” hefennu, or hefenr : 
 
 [= , and i , which Brugsch 
 oe —> 
 
 renders “ tadpoles,” giving as the Arabic equi- 
 
 valent Edwe Ny the young dofda. The 
 word has also the secondary meaning 100,000 
 or an indefinite number. ‘The interchange of 
 aspirates and sibilants is, common, indeed 
 regular in Zend and Sanscrit, in Greek and 
 Latin, Another word comes even nearer, 
 
 aN , tsfdt, which has the exact corre- 
 a 
 
 spondents’ of y, 5, and 7; the word means 
 
 snake or “viper,” but appears to be generic 
 for reptiles. It is to be observed also that 
 
 IN? , hefed, means to squat; a very 
 
 probable etymology. 
 
 19. O38: found in Isaiah, but uncommon. 
 No satisfactory etymology is given, nor does 
 the word occur in the same sense in the 
 cognate languages. In this passage four 
 words are given, rivers, streams, agammim, 
 and generally every reservoir or collection of 
 water. “ Agam” may be assumed to be a 
 well known local term. I find no exact 
 Egyptian equivalent, and the Hebrews pro- 
 bably modified that which they adopted. But 
 
 % _— e ° 
 . P A= , chnum, le puits, la citerne, 
 
 Brugsch, D. H., p. 1100, would answer the 
 conditions of an exact correspondence in 
 sense, and resemblance in sound. A well 120 
 cubits deep is mentioned in an inscription 
 quoted p. 246. Another word occurs in the 
 Ritual, 99, 26, which comes nearer in form, 
 viz., Achem, which is mentioned in con- 
 nexion with the Nile, but the meaning is un- 
 certain. 
 
 vili. 3. The combination of these words, 
 shown above to be probably Egyptian, is 
 remarkable, DYTIDY AH PW. It is an 
 instance of the custom of Moses, in describing 
 Egyptian events, to use words either purely 
 Egyptian or common to the two languages. 
 
 “3m, oven. The word is not uncom- 
 mon, but occurs more frequently in the 
 Pentateuch than elsewhere. The etymo- 
 
 logy is uncertain. The Coptic @pIp, 
 or “J PIP, comes very near ; the permutation 
 
 of p and Mis common. The Egyptian sup- 
 plies “‘ nennu,” to bake or roast, D. H., p. 784, 
 and “hir,” an oven; combined, the two words 
 give all the elements, but the connection is 
 scarcely probable. The old Egyptian must 
 have had a form from which the Coptic cer- 
 tainly, and probably the Hebrew also, was 
 derived. 
 
 14. Wn, in the sense “heap,” is peculiar to 
 this passage. 
 
 16. D°95: the word occurs six times in this 
 passage, and nowhere else, except in Ps. cv. 
 31, which is taken from it. No probable 
 Hebrew root is suggested, nor is the word 
 extant in the Semitic dialects. The Arabic 
 Chaldee and Syriac translators use a word 
 quite distinct from it. The Egyptian has no 
 name for an insect corresponding to this, but 
 
 it has the root “ken,” A * , in the 
 
 sense force and abundance, a sense which in 
 one word is developed into multitudinous 
 
 A BS ees one of the commonest 
 words in the language; and in another, 
 
 HH 5 
 
490 
 
 A em , takes the sense plague, calamity, 
 
 &c. The Coptic has 9¢f{e, percussit. This 
 sense is further determined in one variant by the 
 
 sign yQ , which associates the plague with a 
 
 bad smell and corruption. One passage quoted 
 by Brugsch is curious, since it points to a peri- 
 odical visitation : “ The year did not bring the 
 plague(ken) at the usual time.” This quotation 
 gives a peculiar force to the exclamation of 
 Pharaoh’s magicians, “It is the finger of God:” 
 they recognised it as a severe visitation. 
 The word is identified 5 ry with the 
 
 Egyptian VA AA & 24.,, chenemms, 
 the mosquito. It is pare in the Coptic 
 WOARRE, kavey, culex. See D. H., p. 
 1103. 
 
 21. 39pm: the word occurs nowhere but 
 in the description of this plague, seven times 
 here, and twice in Psalms Ixxviii. 45, and cv. 
 31. The Semitic root 37y is very common, 
 but is nowhere connected with insects or a 
 a of any kind. A late Egyptian word, 
 
 ey at 0% , Abeb, i.e. a beetle, resembles 
 
 the Hebrew in form, and is connected 
 
 ‘with several words, uf 28s 2aks 
 which deeteem ks, em of flies: as for 
 
 ae , D.H., p. 183, Cham- 
 
 be 
 
 pollion Gr., p. 74, which evidently de- 
 notes a venomous fly. It is possible either 
 that the Hebrews, adopting the Egyptian 
 word, accommodated it to their own common 
 root, or that the middle letter 4 may have 
 been, for the same reason, substituted for 3 
 in the transcription. The oldest forms of 
 
 instance 
 
 “and 3, i.e. , are scarcely distinguish- 
 
 able; and even in the Samaritan, which adds 
 a line to the b, they are easily confused, 
 Gg qv: The Coptic Pentateuch uses the 
 
 wordaf, NIAC adding MO~CZOP, “ dog,” 
 to express the kuvépua of the LXX. This 
 conjecture is somewhat confirmed by the 
 affinity thus brought out with r)n}, the fly, 
 especially “the fly that is in the uttermost 
 parts of the rivers of Egypt,” Isaiah vii. 18. 
 
 23. MI, separation, not found elsewhere 
 in this sense: it is from Semitic. 
 
 ix. 8.9, d. A. Gesenius derives it from 
 mp =n). If this probable connection be 
 correct, the word would be common to the 
 Egyptian and Hebrew, nef, nefu, to breathe, 
 or blow. 
 
 waa occurs only in the Pentateuch. 
 
 The Arabic has ras, , lgnem extudit, which 
 
 may, or may not, be the root. No Semitic 
 etymology is ‘satisfactory. The Chaldee, 
 Syriac, and Arabic employ a different word. 
 
 ESSAY ON EGYPTIAN WORDS 
 
 I find no Egyptian equivalent; the nearest 
 
 in form and sense is @| p a , xabs, a burn- 
 
 ing lamp. Perhaps Pathe ese to bake, of 
 
 which yp5 would be the transcription, may 
 have had a variant nearer to the Hebrew. 
 The word is used in a late variant in the 
 sense of baking bricks, or more probably 
 
 “using a lime kiln.” A curious word lately 
 discovered by Mr. Birch, very probably gives 
 
 the true form | gp 4Y , kabusa, in 
 
 Coptic xR REC, avOpak, carbo. ‘Egypt. 
 Zeitschrift, 1868, p. 121. Mr. Birch writes 
 xarRec; Peyron gives x& Rec; and 
 xf ec.—Lex. Copt. This meets the two 
 conditions of agreement in sense and radical 
 letters. 
 
 9. pax, “fine dust,” is a very rare word, 
 twice in the Pentateuch, four times in later 
 books. 
 
 nv, A. V. boils. The word occurs in 
 Job ii. 7, and in reference to Hezekiah. 
 
 Gesenius compares the Arabic ; . » 
 
 be hot, used specially of fever heat: but the 
 word never occurs in connection with erup- 
 tions. A Coptic MS., quoted by Peyron, 
 renders this and the word 7 5 which follows 
 XMOow?Y RepKep, in which the radical 
 letters partly correspond with the Hebrew, 
 x often = w. Possibly the Egyptian came 
 nearer still. The true derivation, however, ap- 
 pears to be CUZ, prurire, of which the Egyp- 
 
 tian form was a A gx , to scratch, a 
 
 word which occurs cure frequen in early papyri. 
 
 The exact transcription is yaku. A variant 
 
 somewhat nearer probably existed, or the 
 
 Hebrews may have adopted and modified it, 
 
 substituting, as in many words, sh for x, and 
 ch for k. 
 
 mp. = Rep Be p>» see last note. 
 NYAYIN, 4 cH The assumed root, }/}3, is 
 not extant. Egyptian has a SS 
 
 Semel) Semel eee 
 
 baba, Cop. Ree, overflow. The x pre- 
 sents no difficulty. 
 
 I5. MD, cut off. In this sense it occurs 
 once in Zechariah, otherwise only here and in 
 Job iv. 7; xv, 28; xxl. 20. The Cepia 
 
 KUOps cedere, abscindere, is connected 
 
 with the root Aj » Md. 7a\ , cay 
 AA] y ct, engrave, carve ; still nearer is 
 
 OeTtOuwT, concidere, cedere. 
 31. mw, flax, a common word, is pro- 
 bably Egyptian. No satisfactory Semitic 
 
IN THE PENTATEUCH. 
 
 etymology is proposed ; the Arabic has ys, 
 to which Fuerst gives the sense “ carminari,” 
 ‘without authority as it would seem: nor is 
 the meaning assigned to it by Gesenius sup- 
 ported by Arabic Lexicographers. A glance 
 at Freytag will show how utterly uncon- 
 nected the meaning is with flax. Gesenius 
 observes that it is found in Avicenna. I 
 believe that in Syriac and Arabic it is merely 
 a derivative meaning. Gesenius observes 
 that the word does not occur in any Semitic 
 dialect. He had good reason to reject the 
 conjectures of Forster; he would probably 
 not have hesitated to adopt the etymology 
 
 suggested by the Egyptian ¥ , Pek, flax, 
 
 linen, and linen stuffs. It is a very common 
 word, known first from the Rosetta stone. 
 The change of “k” to “sh” is normal. 
 Brugsch, p. §15, compares it with Anwp. 
 yaid. A. The assumed root y33 does 
 -not occur in any Semitic dialect. In Egyp- 
 
 tian GS Be | y at ,gabu, blossom, corre- 
 
 sponds very nearly. ‘D. H., p. 755. 
 
 32. npoDD, “spelt,” occurs very seldom. 
 The Arabic which resembles it is uncommon, 
 
 Sham ? it is used by Saddia in translating 
 Is. XXviil. 25. Freytag gives Kw, 
 vicia, vetch, but without a root, and 
 
 it evidently is a strange word, probably 
 a compound word, and of Egyptian origin. 
 
 f Re , sim, Coptic CIQX, is a gencral 
 
 name for herbs, and is used in the Coptic 
 Version of v. 25. A compound word of 
 uncertain meaning, but denoting some vege- 
 table food, is found in the ‘Ritual, c. 124, 4: 
 
 pe Se * 
 ae ‘ 4ew , chersemau, which corre- 
 
 sponds very nearly to the Hebrew grain 
 — Pan , kemetta, or kemdut, written also 
 
 1 RAW , means a kind of corn, represented 
 
 \ 
 \ on the Sarcophagus of Seti; Bon., p. 2, 
 
 Boleas Bs 43 3-D. H., p. 1497. 
 
 32. mbepyy, d. A. No Semitic root is found ; 
 that suggested by Gesenius is unsatisfactory, 
 s 
 
 Ms} has the sense deficit, latuit, whence 
 G. elicits the meaning, late in season, tender. 
 
 In Egyptian Pict J 4 XC , pirt, or pilt. Brugsch 
 
 renders the word “jeunes plantes qui viennent 
 de pousser,” the exact meaning of the 
 Hebrew. 
 
 rivations are doubtful, see note 
 
 491 
 
 xl, II. MDH, Passover. The Semitic de- 
 
 in loc. 
 
 The Egyptian 0 X'S esh-t, corre- 
 eelaena maw’ , 
 
 sponds very nearly in form, and exactly in 
 meaning and construction. Champollion, Gr., 
 p. 446, gives two examples, to extend the 
 arms Or wings over a _ person, protecting 
 him. 
 
 15. Nw, leaven; the word occurs only 
 in this chapter. Gesenius compares 7p, to 
 
 boil. In Egyptian po Vrs with vari- 
 
 ants pronounced seri, means “seethe,” 
 “seething pot.” It is connected with seru, 
 cheese, or buttermilk. There can be little 
 doubt of the connexion with the Hebrew, 
 and the Egyptian probably supplies the true 
 root. yn, leavened dough, does not occur 
 in the same sense out of the Pentateuch, 
 unless it be in Amos iv. 5, when it seems 
 rather to mean “spoil.” The Coptic has 
 2,XLX, acid, which, corresponding with it 
 exactly in form and nearly in sense, implies 
 an Egyptian root; but it may be taken from 
 the Arabic. The Egyptian for fermentation 
 does not seem to be connected with it, 
 le i 
 
 > NG 
 
 Coptic CHT €,see Chabas ‘Mél’ii.p. 219; 
 though the radical letters might be brought 
 under the common law of transmutation 
 between aspirants and sibilants. 
 
 22. Dp, basin, or, according to some, 
 “threshold,” see note iz Joc. The latter 
 sense is somewhat confirmed by the Eg. 
 
 t i) FA , sep, a step, or threshold. 
 
 Considerable additions may be made to 
 this list, which will probably form the basis 
 of a separate treatise. Enough has been 
 said to show that Moses habitually uses 
 words which existed in Egyptian, and for the 
 most part cannot be shown to have a true 
 Semitic etymology. 
 
 stf; which is represented by the 
 
 — — 
 
 Since the preceding pages were finally re- 
 vised for the press the writer has received the 
 ‘ Journal Asiatique’ for March and April, 1870. 
 It contains an article by M. Harkavy, en- 
 titled, “‘ Les Mots Egyptiens de la Bible.” It 
 does not include proper names. In some 
 important points the writer has the satisfac- 
 tion of finding his conclusions supported by 
 this Egyptologer, who appears not to have 
 seen these Essays, which were sent to Paris 
 towards the end of last year. 
 
 The following derivations are partly new 
 and of much interest. 
 
 Gen. xli. 43. M. Harkavy adopts Ap-rech, 
 chief of the Rech, or men of learning ; a deri- 
 
492 
 
 vation noticed above, p. 483. He defends the 
 transcription of p by 4, and ch by &, and cer- 
 tainly shows that in words common to Hebrew 
 and Egyptian they are sometimes interchanged. 
 He gives also what appears to be the true 
 equivalent of n%35, see above, p. 491, viz. 
 Chenemms. 
 
 Gen. xli. 2, Achu. 
 as that given above. 
 
 xli. 8. Chartummim, magicians. In a 
 note, p. 109, M. Harkavy observes: “Un 
 savant distingué, qui a lu notre travail, re- 
 marque qu'il avait pensé au radical tem qui 
 signifie prononcer, énoncer, avec la particule 
 cher. \Linitiale cher forme en effet des titres 
 avec d’autres mots.” The reader will find 
 this derivation stated and defended in the 
 note at the end of Exodus, c. vil., p. 279. It 
 was mentioned by the writer to some scholars 
 both in England and Paris, by whom it was 
 approved. 
 
 The same derivation 
 
 ESSAY ON EGYPTIAN WORDS 
 
 N30, tena, a sacred basket. The deriva- 
 tion has been given in note on Exod. xvi. 
 Exod. vii. 11, 22. Mr. Harkavy derives 
 
 p> yd from Rech-chet, a magician, or man 
 of learning. ‘The writer prefers the ety- 
 mology proposed, p. 276. 
 
 Gen. xlix. 5, m)72%9, rendered habitation, 
 probably equivalent to Macher, a granary. 
 
 Gen. xii. et passim, “ Pharaoh.” ‘The deri- 
 vation proposed above is defended. 
 
 Gen. xli. 45. Zaphnath Paaneh. M. 
 Harkavy gives the same value to the first 
 syllable, Zaph, food, and to the word Paaneh, 
 life. For the middle syllable he proposes net, 
 saviour, ‘The transcription given above still 
 appears preferable to the writer, who is glad 
 to find M. H. in accord with him in regard 
 to the more important terms, food and life. 
 
 The derivations of Shesh and Pak, fine 
 linen, have been already noted, 
 
 END OF PART I. 
 
Bible. English. 1871. 
 Authorized. 
 
 The Holy Bible 
 
 * 36322 
 
fds Ooi, Sas on 5 as 
 ps Ne S25 teers 474 
 
 TTT 
 
 0112 122317594 
 
 ay 
 
 a, 
 
 nt 
 Gs peat Ties 
 
 ve 
 
 hy 
 Me 
 Pi 
 
 ea 
 
 v7 
 
 i 
 
 adh se 
 
 — 
 
 en 
 
 eS ad 
 
 depute reeies 
 
 rst Ti 
 ae 
 
 me 
 ~ 
 
 7 
 
 "the 
 
 paar 
 OU 
 
 ae 
 
 fewer ramon nym = « cunaine ore 
 
 aa