'Y2^LE«'¥]MWEI^SI[Tr¥''

From the
COLLECTION OF OXFORD BOOKS
made by
FALCONER MADAN
Bodley's Librarian

THE OBJECTIONS

TO THE

HISTORICAL CHARACTER OP THE PENTATEUCH,
IN PAET I. OF DE. COLENSO'S
" PENTATEUCH AND BOOK OF JOSHUA,"
CONSIDERED, AND SHEWN TO BE UNFOUNDED.

BY

EDWAED GKESWELL, B.D.
FELLOW OF COBPUS CHRISTI COLLEGE, OXFORD.

LONDON:
EIVINGTONS, WATEELOO PLACE.
PAEKEE, OXFOED.
DEIGHTON, BELL AND CO., CAMBEIDGE.
MDCCCLXIII.

nix^os

43d

OXFORD:
PRINTED BY T. COMBE, E. PICKARD HALL, AMv H. LATHAM.
PRINTERS TO THE T DIVERSITY'.

ADVEETISEMENT TO THE EEADER

" If my conclusions/' observes the Author of ' the Penta
teuch and Book of Joshua critically examined/ "vvere only
speculations, if they -were only matters of higher or lower
prohability, I feel that I should have no right to express them
at all in this way, and thus, it may be, disturb painfully the
belief of many. But the main result of my examination of
the Pentateuch, — viz. that the narrative, whatever may be its
value and meaning, cannot be regarded as historically true, —
is not, — unless I greatly deceive myself, — a doubtful matter
of speculation at all; it is a simple question oi facts." Pre
face, p. XX.
In this view of the nature of the controversy between
Dr. Colenso, in this first Part of his Work, and the defenders
of the historical character of the Pentateuch, the Author of the
following pages is entirely disposed to concur. It is a ques
tion of FACTS throughout — and a question of that kind, which,
in every instance, has one and the same issue in view, viz.
Whether the facts and circumstances of the case, as' repre
sented in ' the Pentateuch and Book of Joshua critically
examined,-" or as they are bound to be represented according
to the simple historical construction and sense of the original
accounts, and as they will be found to be represented and
explained in the following pages, are more truly the facts of
Scripture. And such being the general plan and argument of the
following Work, with respect to the details, nothing is neces
sary except to explain to the reader that, whenever in the
discussion of these questions, there was occasion to refer to
some Chronology of the Old Testament, the Author has con
sidered himself at liberty to borrow the requisite data from a
a a

iv ADVERTISEMENT.
Work of his own on that subject ; which, though still unpub
lished, has long been lying by him, in a state little short of
completion, and waiting only the additional light and con
firmation which the ' History of the Pririiitive Calendar' is
calculated to reflect upon it. Specimens of this Work were
given in his Fasti Cath oli cia, from which an idea might be
formed of the circumstantiality with which it went through
the whole of the Old Testament history, from first to last.
The Author has good grounds for the confidence which he
places in it, and he has not scrupled to refer to it whenever it
was necessary.
He begs leave also to observe that besides the Objections
formally insisted on in this first Part of Dr. Colenso's Work,
and consequently noticed, and to the best of the Author's
ability answered, in the present Work, doubts are insinuated,
if not avowed, of the truth of the Scripture aecount of the
Creation, and a very decided opinion is expressed on the
Scripture account of the Deluge, and on that of the first, if
not of the second also, of the Miracles affecting the sun.
If none of these objections in particular is noticed in the
following pages, it is not because they escaped the observation
of the Author, nor because he was disposed to underrate the
gravity and importance of the questions so raised, but simply
because each of them had been anticipated in another Work
of his, ' The Three Witnesses, and the Threefold Cordb'— the
publication of which preceded only by a short time that of
this first Part of Dr.Colenso-'s Examination. Had Dr. Colenso
seen that Work, before the publication of his o-wn, he might
perhaps have learnt from it that it was possible to answer the
question of his Zulu (Preface, pp. vii. and viii.) without being
under the necessity of ' speaking lies in the Name of the
Loed/ and still more probably might have seen reason to
hesitate before he ventured to pronounce the simple and ob
vious construction and explanation of either of those miracles,
(Preface, p. x. and note,) something, ' which every natural
philosopher would know to be wholly untenable.'
¦' Fasti Calli. ii. i6g sijq. ; ibid, ij] sqq. '' Pp. 1-55, 5,1-79, 9S-1 tjg.

Works ly the same Avihor.

FASTI TEMPORIS CATHOLICI AND ORIGINES KALEN-
DARIjE. (History ofthe Primitive Calendar, Part I : Origines Kalendarise
^gyptiacse, Sinicse, Indicse, or History of the Primitive Calendar among
the Egyptians, the Chinese, and the Hindus.) In four volumes, Svo.
Oxford, at the University Press, 1S52.
GENERAL TABLES of the FASTI CATHOLICL or FASTI TEM
PORIS PERPETUL from A.M. i B. C. 4004, to A.M. 6004 A. D. 2000.
I volume, 4to. Oxford, at the University Press, 1S52.*
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES, AND INTRODUCTION TO THE
TABLES, of the Fasti Catholici, both the General and the Supplementary.
I volume, Svo. Oxford, at the University Press, 1852.
ORIGINES KALENDARI^ ITALICS. (History of the Primitive
Calendar, Part II.) Nundinal Calendars of Ancient Italy, Nundinal Calen
dar of Romulus, Calendar of Numa' Pompilius, Calendar of the Decem
virs, Irregular Roman Calendar, and JuUan Correction. Tables of the
Roman Calendar from U. C. 4 of Varro B. C. 750, to U. C. 1108 A. D.
355. In four volumes, Svo. Oxford, at the University Press, iSg4.
ORIGINES KALENDARLE HELLENICJE; or the History of the
Primitive Calendar among the Greeks, before and after the Legislation of
Solon; (Part III.) In six volumes, Svo. Oxford, at the University
Press, 1S62.
DISSERTATIONS UPON THE PRINCIPLES AND AR-
RANGEMENT OF AN HARMONY OF THE GOSPELS. Second
Edition. In four volumes, Svo. Oxford, at the University Press, 1S37.
PROLEGOMENA AD HARMONIAM EVANGELICAM, sive de
primariis nonnuUis, ad Chronologiam Evangelicam spectantibus, Disser
tationes quatuor. Accedunt Kalendarii Anni Saeri, ab anno A. Ch. N.
1511 usque ad A. D. 94, in annis expansis Tabulae LXXXV : Neomenia-
rum Anni Saeri Tabula? Synopticae vi : Characterura Mensium Anni Saeri
Tabula Generalis r. Oxonii, e Typographeo Acaderaico, mdcccxl.
* N.B. Tiiese Tables, though published along with the First Part, are equally
necessary to every succeeding Part. One Copy however is competent to serve
for the whole work.

HARMONIA EVANGELICA, sive Quatuor EvangeUa atque Actus
Apostolorum Grsece, pro temporis et rerum serie in Partes Sex distributi.
Editio tertia. i vol. Svo. Oxonii, e Typographeo Academico, mdcccxl.
Editio quarta. Oxonii, e Typographeo Academico, mdcccxlv.
Editio quinta. Oxonii, e Typographeo Academico, mdccclv.
AN EXPOSITION OF THE PARABLES, AND OF OTHER
PARTS OF THE GOSPELS. Five volumes in six. Svo. Oxford,
Printed by S. CoUingwood, Printer to the University, for J. G. and F.
Rivington, &c. 1834. By the same Author.
JOANNIS MILTONI FABULAE, SAMSON AGONISTES ET
COMUS, Grsece. Interpretatus est Edvardus Greswell, S.T.B. Cofl! CC.
apud Oxon. Socius. Oxonii, excudebat S. Collingwood, Academiae Typo-
graphus; veneunt apud J. H. Parker, &c. mdcccxxxii.
PRELIMINARY ADDRESS OF THE ORIGINES KALEN-
DARIyE ITALICiE, lately published at the Oxford University Press, with
some further Observations. Oxford, John Henry Parker, &c. 1854
THE THREE WITNESSES, AND THE THREEFOI-D CORD;
being the Testimony of the Natural Measures of Time, of the Primitive
Civil Calendar, and of Antediluvian and Postdiluvian Tradition, on the
Principal Questions of Faot in Sacred or Profane Antiquity. London,
Rivingtons, Waterloo Place; Parker, O.vford, &c, 1S62.

CONTENTS.

Question I. The Family of Judah.
(Colenso, ch.ii. pp. 17-20.)  3
II. The Size of the Court of the Tabernacle, compared with
the Number of the Congregation.
(Colenso, ch. iv. pp. 31-34.)  11
«
III. Moses and Joshua addressing all Israel.
(Colenso, ch. V. pp. 35-37.)  23
IV. The Extent of the Camp, compared with the Priests'
Duties. (Colenso, ch. vi. pp. 38-40.)  27
V. The Number of the people at the first muster, compared
with the PoU-tax raised six months previously.
(Colenso, ch. vii. pp. 41-44.)  33
VI. The Sojourning of the Israelites in Egypt.
(Colenso, ch. xv. pp. 91-95.)  40
VII. The Exodus in the fourth Generation.
(Colenso, ch. xvi. pp. 96-101.) .. .. .. .. 45
VIII. The numbers of the Israelites at the time of the Exodus.
(Colenso, ch. xvii. pp. 102-106.)  50
IX. The number of the Firstborn, compared with the number
of Male Adults.
(Colenso, ch. xiv. pp. 84-90.)  61
X. Increase of the Tribes in Egypt, and the mode in which it
was probably effected.
(Colenso, ch. xvii. pp. 102-106.)  69
XI. Increase of the Tribes which had one founder only, Dan,
Manasseh, and Ephraim ; and that of the Tribe of Levi.
(Colenso, ch. xviii. pp. 107-112.)  80

viii CONTENTS. Page
Question XII. The Institution ofthe Passover.
(Colenso, ch. x. pp. 54-60.)  83
XIII. On the true interval of Time taken up by the Circum
stances preliminary to the Exodus.
(Colenso, ch. x. pp. 54-60.)  91
XIV. On the March from Egypt, and the Order in which it
was made. (Colenso, ch. xi. pp. 61-64.)  99
XV. The Israelites dweUing in Tents.
(Colenso, ch. viii. pp. 45-47.)  105
XVI. The IsraeUtes armed.
(Colenso, ch. ix. pp. 48-53.)  109
XVII. The Extent of the Camp, and the daily Necessities of
the People.
(Colenso, ch. vi. pp. 38-40.)  125
XVIII. The Sheep and Cattle of the Israelites in the Desert.
(Colenso, ch. xii. pp. 65-81.)  133
XIX. The Numbers of the IsraeUtes, compared with the Ex
tent of the Land of Canaan.
(Colenso, ch. xui. pp. 82, 83.)  151
XX. The Priests, and their Duties at the Celebration of the
Passover. (Colenso, ch. xxi. pp. 131-138.)  155
XXI. The Number of Priests at the Exodus, compared with
their. Duties, and the Provision made for them.
(Colenso, ch. XX. pp. 122-T30.)  165
XXII. The War on Midian.
(Colenso, ch. xxu. pp. 139-146.)  i^^

HISTOEICAL CHAEACTEE

OF

THE PENTATEUCH

HISTORICAL CHARACTER
OF THE PENTATEUCH.

Question I. — The Family of Judah.
(Colenso, ch. ii. pp. 17-ao.)

(1.) The question which has to be eonsidered in reference to
the above subject is this : Whether Hezron and Hamul, sons
of Pharez, and grandsons of Judah, could have been born
before the Descent into Egypt. Dr. Colenso (19) infers from
Gen. xlvi. la, (and in my opinion rightly,) that Hezron and
Hamul were included among those who went down into
Egypt j but (ao) he cannot reconcile the fact of their being
already born before the Descent, with the history of the mar
riages and births, in the family of Judah in particular, given
in Gen. xxxviii. And the dilemma, to which he would reduce
the defenders of the historical truth of the Pentateuch in
this instance, is this. That if they maintain the literal truth
of Gen. xxxviii, they must give up two of the Seventy, line
ally descended from Jacob, who either came with Jacob into
Egypt, or were already there at the time of his coming. If
they maintain the integrity of the Seventy, including Hezron
and Hamul, they must give up the historical truth of Gen.
xxxviii. It shall be my endeavour, with God's help, to shew
that there is no inconsistency between these two things ; that
we are at liberty to believe in the simple historical truth of
Gen. xxxviii, down to the birth of Pharez and Zarah, and at
liberty also to believe that Hezron and Hamul, sons of Pharez,
and grandsons of Judah, born after the close of Gen. xxxviii,
were nevertheless two of the Sixty-six (lineally descended
from Jacob, Gen. xlvi. %6) who went do-wn with him to
B a

4 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch, [quest, i.
Egypt, and two of the Seventy, who either came into Egypt
vnth him, or were found there at his coming.
(3.) To go to the bottom of this question indeed would
require me to enter on the consideration of the births of
the children of Jacob in general ; and that, as I freely con
fess, would be an intricate and difficult subject : especially if
we took into account the conditions of the Problem itself
which would thus have to be solved, — That all these chil
dren, with the exception of one, must have been bom in
Padan-aram, and all within an interval of time not exceed
ing seven years at the utmost. It must appear, at first sight,
a difficult and almost an impossible undertaking, by any
arrangements of our own, founded on such data as are
discoverable at this distance of time, to bring the births of
eleven sons and one daughter, in one and the same family,
consistently with the laws of nature, and consistently with
every known faet in their subsequent history, -within the com
pass of the same six or seven years. And yet it ean be done,
— and in my Chronology ofthe Old Testament, of which I have
already given some account, I thank God, it has been done, —
from the birth of Reuben^, in the eighty-fifth year of the life
of Jacob, and in the first year of the second seven years' serviee
with Laban, B. C. i8aa, and (as it may very probably be as
sumed) in the month of February in that year, do-wn to the
births of Josephb and Dinah« respectively, (both which appear
to have been determined to the same year,) B.C. 1816, the
former very probably in the month of May, the latter in the
month of October, in that year.
(3.) To produce this Table here, accompanied with the neces
sary explanations, would requii-e too many details, and take
up too much time ; but if the reader will allow me at present
to assume its existence, and the fact of its having been sub
stantiated by the proper proofs throughout, then Judah, the fifth
son of Jacob, having been born, according to this Table, B.C.
i8ao, (and very probably towards the end of July or the be
ginning of August that year,) would be forty-two years old
complete at the end of July or the beginning of August,
B. C. 1778. And the true chronology of the history of Jacob
and of his family, from the birth of his last child in Padan-
a Gen. xxix.32. b lb. x,\x. 22-24. "^ Id. 21.

QUEST. I.] Family of Judah. 5
aram, B.C. i8i6, to his return to the land of Canaan, B.C.
1 8 ID, and from the time of this return to that of the Descent
into Egypt, conspiring to determine the date of this Descent
at last to B.C. 1778, and very probably to the autumnal
quarter of that year, it follows that Judah, born July br
August, B.C. i8ao, must have been forty-two years old, and
two or three months more, (that is, in his forty-third year,) at
the time of the Descent. And the question, which we have to
consider under these circumstances, is. Whether one, who was
at the utmost only forty -two years old complete, or in his forty-
third year still far from complete, could have been the father
of three sons, already grown up in some sense or other, before
the birth of a fourth, as related Gen. xxxviii. i-ii, and the
father of a fourth, as related Gen. xxx-viii. 13-30 ; himself too
grown up and the father of two sons, (as it must be inferred
from Gen. xlvi. la,) before the Descent into Egypt. And this
is the question which I shall now proceed to consider.
(4.) The first thing necessary for this purpose is to explain
the connection between Gen. xxxvii. and xxxviii. with respect
to which Dr. Colenso appears to have laboured under a double
mistake. Ch. xxxvii. is devoted to the history of Joseph,
fi-om a certain time of his life to that of his being sold into
Egypt, xxx-vii. a5-a8, '^6, the last thing related in that chap
ter; and this time in the life of Joseph being represented,
xxxvii. a, as that when he was seventeen years of age. Dr.
Colenso (ao. i.) appears to have inferred from this note of
time that Joseph was sold into Egypt when he was seventeen
years of age ; and consequently that the whole of this chapter
in his history belongs to the seventeenth year of his age.
Joseph, as I have already explained, was born probably in the
month of May, B. C. 1816 j and consequently must have been
sixteen complete, and in his seventeenth year, after the month
of May, B. C. 1800. His history in Egypt is demonstrative
that he must have been brought there in B. C. 179a. The
true extent of the time then, embraced by his history in this
37th chapter of Genesis, must have been eight years ; from
some time later than May, B. C. 1800 (Gen. xxxvii. a) to the
time when he was actually brought into Egypt (xxxvii. a8, 36),
and that, some time evidently in the summer, (xxxvii. 34, a8,)
B.C. 179a.

6 Historical Character of the Tentateuch. [quest, i.
(5.) The last event of this 37th chapter having thus been
this sale of Joseph into Egypt, (as Dr. Colenso supposes,
when he was only seventeen years of age,) and the next
chapter, which gives the account of the marriages and births
in the family of Judah, beginning with his own, being
ushered in by the words, " And it came to pass at that time,
that Judah went down,-" &c.. Dr. Colenso has construed this
note of time as if it implied that the beginning of this 38th
chapter was consecutive on the end of the 37th j and conse
quently that the first thing related in this 38th chapter, the
marriage of Judah to the daughter of Shuah, was synchronous
with, or directly consecutive upon, the last event in the pre
ceding chapter, the sale of Joseph into Egypt : fi'om which it
must have followed, as he himself argues (ao), that if Joseph
was sold into Egypt at seventeen years of age, this marriage
of Judah's, (who was only four years older than Joseph,) syn
chronous \vith it, or directly consecutive upon it, must have
taken place when Judah was twenty or twenty-one. But
this is to mistake the idiom of Scripture, in the case of this
phrase, " At that time," or " In those days," or the like, — and
not only in the Old Testament, but in the New also'^, — ac
cording to which it is much more frequently J^>rcl«^ec^^»e than
retrospective, in its reference to the context of events, and
more properly intended to draw attention to what is about to
be related, than to what has just happened. The truth is
that the first event related in this 38th chapter, the marriage
of Judah in the first instance to the daughter of Shuah, is
related where it is, merely because of its connection with what
follows, — merely as the first of a series of causes and efiects,
of antecedents and consequents, which ultimatelj- led to the
birth of Pharez and Zarah as the sons of Judah himself by
Thamar ; and the true link of connection, between the chro
nology of the 37th chapter and that of the 38th, is the date
of the last event recorded in the former, the sale of Joseph into
Egypt; B.C. 179a, and the date of the last event recorded in
the latter, the birth of Pharez and Zarah, the sons of Judah
and Thamar, which turns out to have been B. C. 179a also.
(6.) The question therefore, whieh we have still to consider,
is this : — The date of the birth of Judah being known, the
"• Cf. Matt. iii. i, xii. i, siv. i ; Mark, viii. i ; Luke, xx. i.

QUEST. I.] Family of Judah. 7
summer quarter, B.C. i8ao— the date of the Descent into
Egypt being known, the autumnal quarter, B.C. 1778— and
the age of Judah himself at that time being known — can the
marriages and births in the family of Judah, recorded in Gen .
xxxviii. — beginning with his own marriage, and ending with
the births of Pharez and Zarah, yet taking in also the mar
riage of Pharez, and the births of Hezron and Hamul, as both
implied in Gen. xlvi. la — be reasonably supposed to have come
to pass in the first forty-two or forty-three years of the lifetime
of Judah himself? by reasonably being understood, (whether a
priori to be expected or not,) without offence against any
knovm law of nature. And this question, it is evident, would
be reducible to the more general one. What is the earliest
time of life at which men, without any offence against the
laws of nature, may be supposed capable of marrying and
having children ? And the ultimate answer to that, it is evi
dent, must be returned by the proper reply to the question.
What is the standard of the age of puberty ? What is the
earliest time of life at which men attain to the age of
puberty ?
(7.) Now with respect to this standard, as recognized and
assumed among the Jews in particular, it may be inferred
from the Mishna and from Maimonides^, that in females the
age of puberty was reckoned at twelve years and a daj', and
in males at thirteen years and a day ; an assumption which
no one will suspect of having erred on the side of defect,
but which may very well be conjectured to have done so on
the side of excess. I have shewn in my Origines Kalendarise
Hellenicsef, that among the Greeks, at a very remote period
of their history, the age of puberty in females was a year at
least earlier than this standard of the Mishna ; and that some
of the most celebrated female names in Hellenic antiquity must
have been wives at ten or eleven, and mothers at eleven or
twelve. In males too among the Jews an earlier standard
than that of the Mishna seems to have been practically re
cognized. Josephus reckons the number of males, who returned
after the captivity, from twelve years old and upwardss. We
^ Cf. my Dissertations on the Principles and Arrangement of an Hannony of
the Gospels, vol. ii. 136. (cf i. 378?): 396, 397: 369 m.) iii. 415. ' iv. 507,
508 n: 509 «: 511 : v. 67. 550 : vi. 477. ? Ant. Jud. xi. iii, 10. cf.
I Esdras, v. 41.

8 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, i.
are told^ it was usual with the Jews, as soon as their male
children arrived at the age of puberty, to take them up to
Jerusalem to be made Disciples of the Law, and subject to
the obligation of attendance at the National Solemnities, in
common -with the rest of the male adults ; and our Sa-viour
himself was taken up to Jerusalem, e-vidently for this pur
pose, and equally so for the first time, when he was twelve
years of age, Luke ii. 4a.
(8.) This shorter standard of the age of puberty in males,
twelve or thirteen, is confirmed by the matter of fact, in
more than one instance; as i. in the history of the Patri
archs themselves, by the case of Benjamin. Benjamin, ac
cording to my Chronology, was born (probably in the month
of April) B.C. 1800; and consequently could have been only
twenty-two years and six months old, at the utmost, at the
time of the Descent, the autumnal quarter, B.C. 1778 : and
yet he was even then the father of ten sons, all of them in
cluded, and necessarily included, in the Seventy, Gen. xl-vi. ai.
Aud though it is possible that some of these might have been
twins, we are bound to defend the credibility of the Scripture
account in this instance, if necessary, even on the hypothesis
that all the ten were single births; and that could not be
done except by supposing that .Benjamin began to have
children at twelve or thirteen years of age.
ii. From Josephus' account of the length of the life and of
that of the reign of Solomon*, it may be inferred that he
must have supposed him to have come to the throne at
thirteen or fourteen years of age; and that being assumed,
if, according to Scripture, he reigned only forty years, and
Rehoboam, his son, who succeeded him, was forty-one years old
when he came to the throne, he must have been born when
Solomon was twelve or thirteen. And though the true age
of Solomon, when he began to reign, was more probably
seventeen, yet that Josephus had some authority for his own
assumption on that point, may be inferred from the fact that
Eupolemus also, as quoted by Alexander Polyhistor'', makes
him only twelve at his accession, and only thirteen when he
•> Dissertations, ut supra, i. 397. cf. Joseph. Ant. Jud. v. x. 4. of Samuel.
» Ant. Jud. viii. vii. 8. ^ Praeparatio Evangelica, (Oxonii 1843 1 ix
30.425.8: 34.428.4. ^'"' '

quest. I.J Family of Judah. 9
began to build the temple. The original authors of these
traditions, whosoever they were, could have thought it no
difficulty that Solomon must have been both a king and a
father at twelve or thirteen years of age. And that such was
actually the belief of the Church in Jerome's time, may be
seen from his own testimony'.
iii. But whatever may be thought of this case, there is
another, and a still more remarkable one, in the subsequent
history of the kings of Judah, of which there can be no
doubt. It may be certainly inferred from a Kings xvi. a,
xviii. a, and a Chron. xxviii. i, xxix. i, that Ahaz could not
have been more than eleven or twelve years old at the birth
of Hezekiah. And if Dr. Colenso, or any one else, should be
disposed to think this fact scarcely compatible with the course
of nature, I would recommend him to read that passage of the
Epistolae Criticse of Jerome, just referred to'; where he will
find an account of a case in point, which happened in Jerome's
time. (9.) When we consider the much earlier developement in
hot climates, such as that of Judsea or of Egypt, both of the
physical capabilities and of the physical inclinations, which
must cooperate in order to such an effect as this, of marriages
and births at the earliest possible times, consistent with the
laws of nature, it will not, at least it ought not, to appear
surprising that actual instances of both should be discoverable
even in the domestic history of the Patriarchs, withou't any
regard to the special ends and purposes which the Di-vine
Providence might have had in view in permitting them, or
to the uses to which, in the oeconomy of subsequent events,
they may have been actually subser-vient. The case is still
of not unfrequent occurrence in the Harems of the east, that
loys, as we should call them, w^ fathers at twelve or thirteen,
and young men are grandfathers at twenty-five or twenty-six.
(10.) On this principle, there would be no inconsistency with
any known law of nature under the circumstances of the case,
either anciently or at present, in the assumption that the
marriage of Judah to the daughter of Shuah, the first thing
related Gen. xxxviii. i, 3, might have taken place in his
thirteenth year ; and the births of Er, Onan, and Shelah, the
> Opp. ii. 619. col. a. 620. col. b. (Edit. Bened.) Epp. Criticse. Ad Vitalem.

10 Historical Character of the Pentateuch. [quest, i.
successive fruits of that marriage, in the next three or four
years; and that Er might have been married to Thamar be
fore Judah was twenty-six complete, and Shelah grown up.
Gen. xxxviii. 11-14, (which means arrived at the age of
puberty, and so far at a marriageable age,) when Judah was
still in his twenty-seventh year ; and Pharez and Zarah, his
children by Thamar, might have been born when he was not
more than twenty-eight complete; and Hezron, the eldest
son of Pharez, when Judah was not more than forty-one
complete, and Hamul his youngest, when Judah was not
more than forty-two complete.
(11 .) On this principle at least has my own Chronology of
the Old Testament proceeded in its arrangements of these dif
ferent marriages and births ; and such is the consequence of
these arrangements, that the date of the birth of Pharez, when
Judah was twenty-eight complete, tums out to be B.C. 1792
— the connecting link, as I observed (5), of the chronology
of ch. xxxvii, in the history of Joseph, with that of ch.
xxxviii. in this liistory of the family of Judah. And with
respect to Hezron and Hamul, of whom Dr. Colenso consi
ders it impossible that they could have been bom after all
that is related in this chapter, yet before the Descent into
Egj'pt, it turns out that one of them must have been a year
old, and upwards, and the other a month or two at least old,
at the time of the Descent itself.
(12.) I shall therefore take my leave of this subject -with one
or two general observations, i. There were no doubt reasons,
(and reasons probably connected with the scheme of human
Redemption,) whether they have been made known to us in
Scripture or not, which rendered it necessary that while the
line of the future Messiah should be traced on the father's
side through the family of Abraham perpetually, by the
mother's side, and as that of the promised Seed, it should be
carried on through Thamar, and Rahab, and Ruth, daughters
indeed of Eve, the common mother of all mankind, but in no
sense daughters of Abraham, ii. There might be similar
reasons connected with the foreordained oeconomy of the in
crease of the Tribes in Egypt — if the Twelve Ti-ibes in
general, as the event proved, were destined to lie derived
from fifty-five individual founders in particular, all of them

QUEST. II.] Court, and Numler of the People. 11
born before the Descent, and none of them after, (which was
strictly the case) — to render it necessary that the five founders
of the Tribe of Judah, three of them his sons, and two of
them his grandsons, should all have been born before the
Descent. These reasons, on the supposition that every step
in this whole course of proceedings was part of a Providen
tial eeconomy, to whieh each was alike subservient in its pro
per order of time, might possibly account both for the early
marriage of Judah, in the first instance, and for the early
marriage of Pharez, in the next, as equally necessary to the
birth of these five future founders of the Tribe of Judah in
Egypt, (three of them his sons, Shelah, Pharez, and Zarah,
and two of them his grandsons, Hezron and Hamul,) all in
Canaan, before the Descent into Egypt.

Question II. — The size of the Court of the Tabernacle, compared
with the Number of the Congregation.
(Colenso, ch. iv. pp. 31-34.)

(13.) The Tabernacle being now complete in all its parts,
and having been set up accordingly™, the consecration of
Aaron and his sons to the service of the Tabernacle being
next enjoined^, and all the congregation, agreeably to the
same command'', in order to witness the ceremony of this
consecration, having been gathered together to the door of
the Tabernacle, it is assumed by Dr. Colenso (35) that, " As
the text says distinctly, ' at the door of the Tabernacle,' they
must have come within the court ;" and that being taken for
granted, he proceeds to argue from it, that, according to the
Scriptural representation of the circumstances of these pro
ceedings, it supposes itself, and it requires its readers to sup
pose, that 603,550? men at least, if not more, were admitted
on this occasion into an enclosed space of ground, which was
not capable of containing without inconvenience (38) the
I aoth part of their number.
(14.) The first exception, whieh may be taken to the reason-
m Exod. xl. I-I 7. " Lev. viii. and ix. ° Lev. viii. 3, 4.
p Numb. ii. 32.

12 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest. li.
ing which issues out in such an absurdity as this at last, is
that, for ought which appears to the contrary, it is founded
on a purely gratuitous assumption. Scripture is silent about
the admission of the congregation within the precincts of the
court; and to assume so material a fact as that without
authority is simply gratuitous. We read. Lev. -viii. 3, of the
command, " Gather thou all the congregation together unto
the door of the Tabernacle of the congregation :" and we
read, ver. 4, of the execution of the command, "And Moses did
as the Loed commanded him, and the assembly was gathered
together unto the door of the Tabernacle of the congrega
tion." In both these instances the preposition in the original
is al ; and in both in the English version it is rendered by
unto, and not, as Dr. Colenso {^^ would seem to have read,
by at : though whether unto the door, or at the door, as the
version ofthe Hebrew alphethee, it would be alike opposed to
the supposition of admission inside the door.
(15.) The next exception which may be taken to the same
assumption, and the same reasoning from it, is this. That to
suppose the spectators, assembled on this occasion, admitted
any further than the door, actually admitted within the door,
and consequently into the court, and in such numbers as
woidd have filled the court an hundred times over, would
have defer ^-ed the very end and purpose of their being sum
moned together at all; viz. to witness -with their own eyes
the consecration of Aaron and his sons to the sacerdotal office,
and the first discharge of their functions in that capacity.
This ceremony was to be performed within the court of the
Tabernacle ; part of it in the Tabernacle itself — in the forepart
of the Tabernacle, or Holy Place, at least, where the altar of in
cense, the table of the shew-bread, and the golden candlestick
were all situated — but by far the greater part of it in the
court of the Tabernacle, (the enclosed space, in front of the
Tabernacle,) where the laver of brass, in which the priests
were required to wash their feet, before entering, on any oc
casion, into the Holy Place, and the brazen altar, on which
only all the sacrifices, whether on this occasion, or on any
subsequent occasion, which required the instrumentality of fire,
could be offered, were situated, both in the open airq. For these
1 Exod. xxx. 18-21 : xl. 6, 7, 10, 11, 29, 30.

quest. II.] Court, and Number of the People. 13
purposes, and all the other particulars of this first day's cere
monial. Lev. viii. 6-30, a clear court, a space containing none
but Moses, and Aaron, and Aaron's sons, was absolutely neces
sary. A court filled, and more than filled, with spectators,
would have rendered it absolutely impossible that any part of
the ceremony could have been performed — such for instance
as the disposal ofthe bullock for the sin offering (ver. 14-17)
— with all the solemnity and all the regard to order and form,
prescribed for the occasion, and necessary to be observed
throughout it.
(16.) Again, it is to be observed that this ceremony ofthe
consecration of Aaron and his sons lasted eight days^; though
no more of its particulars are expressly related than those of
the first day and those of the last. Whether the congrega
tion was called together to the door of the Tabernacle on
each of the intermediate days does not appear ; but that they
were summoned to attend on the eighth day, as they had
been on the first, and under the very same circumstances,
does appear. We read at least. Lev. ix. 1-4, of Moses' call
ing Aaron, and his sons, and the elders of Israel together, on
this eighth day, and charging Aaron to bring such and such
offerings on his part, and the elders, or the children, of Israelj
to bring such and such on their part, " Because the Loed
would appear to them on that day ;" i. e. (ver. 33, 24) not only
in the pillar of the cloud as usual, but by fire, upon the altar
of bumt offering, from heaven. And, ix. 5, we read of the
observance of this command : " And they brought that which
Moses commanded before the Tabernacle of the congregation :
and all the congregation drew near, and stood before the
Loed." We may presume then that they were all assembled
on this last day under the same circumstances as on the first
day ; either all within the court of the Tabernacle, or all with
out it.
Now it appears to me, fi-om ix. 15-33, (the account of the
ceremonial of the offerings specially required from the pepple,
for the first time, on this occasion, and now ministerially
offered by Aaron and his sons for the first time also,) that
of these two suppositions the latter only could have been the
truth. For we observe, ix. 33, that, at the end of all, it is
r Lev. viii. 33 — ix. i.

14 Historical Character qf the Pentateuch, [quest, ii.
said, "And Aaron lifted up his hand toward the people,
and blessed them, and came down from offering of the sin
offering, and the burnt offering, and peace offerings." This
" eoming down" is explained by the fact that, as the ap
proach to the altar of burnt offering, though not by means
of steps, was up a stage or inchned plane^, the Priest offi
ciating at this altar must have stood on a platform at the
foot of the altar, more or less elevated above the surface of
the ground or floor of the court. And Aaron, as it is
here observed, while still standing upon this stage, having
made an end of the offering of these sacrifices in behalf of
the people, preparatory to the blessing of the people, which
had yet to be done as the last part of his duty on this
occasion, being said to have first of all lifted up his hand
toward them, what must be inferred from that fact except
that he and the people were standing at the time, relatively
to each other, in such a position, that he could not have
had them close to himself and round about him, (as he must
have had, if they had been admitted into the court,) but at
some distance from him, and in front of him ? The height
of the brazen altar itself was three cubits, or five and a half
feet, (Colenso 36) ; probably three feet and an half above the
level of the stage on whieh the ministering Priest, when
employed about it, had to stand, and consequentlj- not less
than two feet higher than the level of the ground. From
this position, so much higher than the people, if they had
been standing around him at the time, he must have beeu
said to have lifted his hand not toward (al) but over (adi) the
people. But supposing the people collected at the time
at the entrance of the court of the Tabernacle, and Aaron
standing as before on the platform of the altar, in front of
them, (such having been de facto the position of the altar
of burnt offering relatively to the entrance of the court*,)
nothing would appear more natural than this description of
his lifting his hand toward the people, preparatory to his
blessing them ; and by that gesture drawing their attention
to the act which he was about to perform.
(17.) On this question however of the admission or non-
admission of those who are always to be understood by the
'^ Exod. XX. 26. t Ib. xxvii. i-8.

quest. II. j Court, and Number of the People. 15
assembly or congregation of the children of Israel, on any
occasion of this kind, within the precincts of the court of
the Tabernacle, there is one general principle — applicable to
every question of this kind alike — to which if Dr, Colenso
had paid due attention, he would probably never have
thought of instituting any such comparison as that which
is proposed in his Fourth Chapter, between the size of the
court and the number of the congregation. He has abun
dantly made it appear by means of his figures, that the
admission of the congregation into the eourt, under the cir
cumstances of the case, was physically impossible ; and I
shall now proceed to shew — what does not seem to have
occurred to him — that it was morally impossible, — a much
more effectual bar to their admission in a given instance
than the limited dimensions of the court itself; and one
which must have kept them out, though the court itself
had been capable of containing 130 times their number, in
stead of an 130th part of it.
(18.) Now, when I say it was morally impossible that any
part of the congregation of the children of Israel as such,
and much less the whole of them, could have been admitted
within the coui't on this or on any occasion, after the Taber
nacle had once been set up ; — what I mean is that, when
certain distinctions had once been introduced and established
by the Deity himself, in respect of places, as sacred or pro
fane, as appropriated or not appropriated to himself — and in
respect of persons, as set apart or not set apart for his own
ser-vice — and in respect of duties and offices, in relation to
the places where, and the persons by whom, they were to be
performed in his own behalf — to have admitted the congre
gation in general into any part of a sacred enclosure like the
court of the Tabernacle, which was accessible only to the
Priests and the Levites, would have been to confound all
those distinctions of God's own appointment; and therefore
morally impossible. Such distinctions might be, and as the
history of the Exodus proves actually* were, sometimes pre
sumptuously disregarded and violated, on the part of the
people ; but it was morally impossible they ever eould have
been so, with the permission or sanction of the Deity him
self.

16 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, ii.
(19.) Now, with respect to the fact of such distinctions, both
of places and persons and services, as these, the Matenal
Temple of later date, as every one knows, had its first or
outermost court, accessible to Proselytes from the Gentiles ;
and its next to this, accessible to female Israelites ; and its
third, accessible to male Israelites — and beyond this, its
fourth, accessible to the ministerial orders, the Priests and
Levites : and in the centre of this it had the Naos or Sanc
tuary, divided into the Holy Place, and the Holy of HoUes
or Most Holy, the former accessible to the Priests, at all
times, in the order of their daily ministrations, the latter
accessible only to one of their number, the High Priest for
the time being — and to him only on one day in the course of
the year'^. And every one is aware of the jealous -vigilance with
whieh these distinctions were watched over and enforced in
later times; and how impossible it must have been, under
such circumstances, for a Jew to have conceived even the
idea of such an anomaly as that of the admission of Gentile
Proselytes into the court of the female or male Israelites, or
that of the admission of the male or female Israelites into the
court of the Priests and the Levites, or that of the Le-vites
into the Holy Place, accessible only to the Priests, or that of
the Priests in general, into the Holy of Holies, accessible
only to the High Priest, or that of the High Priest himself
into this Place, except on one day in the year.
(20.) These distinctions were not first introduced when the
Material Temple was first built. On the contraiy, they
came into being with the Tabernacle in the Wilderness — and
though carried out to their greatest extent under the first
and the second Temple, yet from the time that the Deity,
after the Exodus, was pleased to institute a standing evi
dence of his presence among his people, in the shape of the
Tabernacle, set up under his own directions, as if for his
personal habitation, and therefore called Messican, (which in
the Hebrew means Dwelling Place,) all these distinctions, of
places and persons and services, followed as matter of course.
It is assigned as one reason for the selection of a single Tribe,
to minister in holy places and in holy things, that the con-
" Cf. Josephus, Contra Apion. ii. 8. p. 1 244, and Ant. Jud. viii. iii. 9 ; De Bello
v. V. 2. 4. 6. 7.

QUEST. II.] Court, and Number ofthe People. 17
gregation from that time forward might be preserved from
the risk of inadvertent and unintentional, as much as wilful
and presumptuous, intrusion into forbidden places or for
bidden services; and thereby from the punishment which
mnst be inflicted on every such offence, whether intentionally
or unintentionally committed*. And there is good reason
to believe that this supposed superior sanctity of one Tribe
above the rest of the Tribes, or of one family in that Tribe
above the rest of the families in it, was something which
the rest of the Tribes in general, or the rest of the Levites in
particular, for a long time were very slow to acknowledge.
The object proposed by the worst and most aggravated of
the rebellions, which are upon record, instigated by Korah,
head of the family of Izhar, among the Levites, and abetted
by Dathan, Abiram, and On, heads of the Tribe of Reuben,
the Primogenital Tribe, and by the 350 of the more infiuential
among the other Tribes, distinct from that of Levi, seems to
have been the assertion of the opposite principle to that of
these distinctions, more than any thing else, — to affirm and
maintain the equal sanctity and equal acceptableness of all
the congregation ; and therefore the equal right of all as much
as of the Tribe of Levi, or of one family in that Tribe, to the
same freedom of access to Holy Places — the same freedom of
approach to the Presence of the Deity — the same right to a
share in the ministrations intended in honour of him — as,
under the existing state of things was exclusively claimed,
and exclusively exercised, by themx. Nor could we desire a
better proof of this than Numb. xvii. 13, 13 — the terms in
which, after the people had been taught, by repeated
chastisements, that these were distinctions, immutably fixed,
not by Moses and Aaron, but by God himself, and, as sueh,
not to be disturbed with impunity, they expressed their re
luctant acquiescence in them at last. " And the children of
Israel spake unto Moses, saying. Behold we die, we perish,
we all perish. Whosoever cometh any thing near unto the
Tabernacle of the Loed shall die. Shall we be consumed with
dying?" Before, they thought they could penetrate with
» Cf. Numb. i. 51 : iii. 10. 3'S : viii. 9, 10-19 ¦ 'f'^'"- ^2- " ^^^ Numb.
xvi. 1-3 : 5. 7, 8-1 1 ; 35. cf 15. 17-19. 32 : xxvi. 9, 10 : xxvii. 3 : xvi. 37-40 :
xviii. 4, 5. 7. 22. C

18 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, n.
impunity into the very presence of God himself. Now, as
the lesson whieh they had learnt from their recent experience,
they think it unsafe to approach within any distance of the
visible residence of God.
(21.) No one requires to be told that, as the Tabernacle was
strictly enjoined to be made after the pattern shewn to Moses
in the Mount ^, so the Temple of after times, on the same
principle, was bound to be conformed, as closely as the
change of circumstances would permit, to the pattem of the
Tabernacle. And so it was in every thing which concemed
the essence of a Moveable Temple, like the Tabernacle in the
Wilderness. The Messican of this Moveable Temple answered
to the Naos of the Material Temple of after times. The
name of Nao? denoted dwelling place in the Greek, and
that of Messican did the same in the Hebrew. The name of
the Sanctuary was common to both. The dimensions and
the component parts of both were the same. Each was
divided into the Holy Place, and the Holy of Hohes or Most
Holy. In both, these were separated from each other by the
Second Veil a. The fiyiov koo-jxikov, as it is called by the
author to the Hebrews'', i. e. the holy furniture, was the same
in each : — in the Holy Place, the altar of incense on one side,
and the table of shew-bread on the other, and the golden
candlestick : — in the Most Holy, simply the ark, and the
contents of the ark, the Testimony, or Two Tables of Stone ;
the mercy seat, and the cherubim of glory : and by the side
of the ark, the authentic copy of the Law, laid up by Moses,
the golden pot of manna, and Aaron's rod which buddedi^.
Without this Naos of later times, and without the Messican
of the Wilderness, was the same open space, enclosed on all
sides, and set apart alike under each for the daily ministra
tion ; containing under each the brazen laver, and the brazen
altar, necessary alike under each to the daily service of the
ministering orders, the Priests and Levites.
(23.) And thus far the paraUel between the Temple of later
times and the Tabernacle in the Wilderness, with respect to

z Exod. xxv. 9. 40 : xxvi. 30 ; xxvii. 8 : Numb. viii. 4 : i Chron. xxviii. 1 1-19 :
Hebrews, viii. 5 : Acts, vii. 44. " Cf. Hebr. ix. 3. b ix. i . c Exod.
xvi. 32. 34 : .\xv. 16 : xl. 20 : Numb. xvii. 10 ; Dout. a. z. 5 : xxxi. 26 : He
brews, ix. 4.

QUEST. 11.] Court, and Num.ber cf the People. 19
the distinction of privileged places and privileged persons
under each, would seem to be coraplete ; and the Naos of the
former to answer to the Messican of the latter, and the court
of the Priests and Levites round about the former to answer
to the eourt of the same two orders, under the latter. But
besides this court, the Temple, it may be said, had two more,
if not three ; the court of the male Israelites, the court of the
female, and the court of the Gentiles : and the question may
be asked. What was there under the Tabernacle to correspond
to these ? The third of these, the court of the Gentiles, may
be left out of sight at present. As to the other two, even
under the Temple it was common to both to be situated
externally to the court of the Priests and Levites, though
next to it ; and though custom appears to have established a
distinction between them, whereby one was confined to the
men, and the other to the women, it- may be questioned
whether this distinction was not due simply to the rules of
society in the east, whereby the female sex, on all occasions
of a public kind, were kept from too close and promiscuous
a contact with the male. But for this rule of private and
public life, there was no reason in the nature of things why
both the male and the female worshippers, who composed the
entire congregation of the people, in contradistinction to the
Levites, even under the Temple, much more under the Taber
nacle, might not have had a common court.
(23.) And this being admitted, the answer to the question
What there was under the Tabernacle in the Wilderness to cor
respond to the men's and the women's court under the Temple,
is the following fact, (the proof of which I reserve for the pre
sent,) that the Tabernacle both at first, and ever after, as
often as it was taken down and set up again, having been
pitched at a certain distance from the General Encampment
of the Tribes, (which admits of being determined,) there was
always a vacant space between the court of the Tabernacle
and the Camp ; large enough to admit without inconvenience
the whole of the congregation, and much more any part of it
less than the whole : and in this vacant space, between the
court of the Tabernacle and the General Encampment, pur
posely left for such uses as these, we have every thing which
c 3

20 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, n.
could be expected under the Tabernacle, to coiTCspond to the
men's and the Women's court under the Temple.
(24.) And this brings us to the question. What is to be
understood by the phrase at the door of the Tabernacle, or of
the assembling of the people at the door of the Tabernacle of
the congregation, of such frequent occurrence in the history of
transactions, after the Tabernacle had once been set up ? A
door, in the ordinary acceptance of the term, is a material
obstruction, adapted both to shut and to open bodily — and
neither the Messican nor the court had any such door as that.
The entrance to the former was not through a door, but
through five pillars, a certain distance asunder, partially hid
by a veil, which hung half way down them in front "^ ; the
entrance to the court was through a gate, which could be
opened or shut pro re nata ; opened, when there was occasion
to go into the court, and shut when there was not.
(25.) And this leads me to observe that the word which in
all these instances is rendered in the Enghsh by Door, in the
original is Phethee; and the proper meaning oiPhethee, accord
ing to Gesenius, is, first, that of an opening, (as for instance of
a gate,) and secondly, that of an entrance, as the consequence
of such an opening, and through the space thereby laid bare.
It is only in its third signification, if at all, that it denotes
what would be commonly understood by Q-upa in Greek, janua
or ostium in Latin, and door in English. Its proper apphca
tion is to the laying open of a space, before closed and shut up
by such an obstacle as a gate ; and it is found in one or two
instances specially constructed -with the Hebrew for gate, ssar,
in the phrase, " Opening of the gate of the city;" Josh. xx. 4,
Judges ix. 35, I Sam. x. 8, and Prov. i. 31 . Such, in my opinion,
is its meaning in all these instances of its use, of which we
are speaking at present, in the phrase of " Gathered or assem
bled unto the door of the Tabemacle of the congregation ;" and
it would have been well, had it been rendered accordingly in
the English version in all of them, " Gathered unto the open
ing, not unto the door, of the Tabemacle of the congregation."
(26.) Now, if the gate of the court of the Tabernacle was of
d Exod. xxvi. 36, 37., xxxvii. 37,38; Hebr. ix. 3 ; Joseph. Ant. iii. vi. 4,
p. 270, 272.

QUEST, II. J Court, and Number of the People. 21
such dimensions as it appears to have been, (twenty cubits^,
between nine and ten yards,) and if it was situated, as it also
appears to have beenf, in front of the Tabernacle — to throw
open this gate was to lay open a full view of the Tabernacle,
at no great distance from it in front; and to summon the
people to this opening, would be the same thing as to sum
mon them lefore the Tabernacle or lefore the Lord, only dif
ferently expressed. And again, if the altar of burnt offering,
and the brazen laver, (both so constantly used in the daily
ministrations,) were situated, as they appear to have beenS, in
a right line between the gate of the court and the Tabernacle,
(the altar, at no great distance from the gate, the laver at
no great distance from the Tabernacle,) it is manifest that
even from the outside of the court, through this gate and
this opening, there would always be a clear and distinct -view
of every thing going on in the court, especially about the
altar and the laver.
(27.) In the last place, we may illustrate and confirm the
above explanation of this phrase. Door of the Tabernacle, by cer
tain instances of its actual use, in which it could not possibly
have meant any thing but the opening of the gate of the court ;
nor the assembling of the people at or unto that door any
thing but their assembling at or unto this opening. As, i. Exod.
xxxviii. 8, where Bezaleel is said to have made the brazen
laver of the looking-glasses of those who assembled, {nrnrg.
assembhng by troops,) at the door of the Tabernacle of the
congregation. Wlio these were, though not specified in the
original, might always have been divined, i. from what is
specified, the nature of their offerings, part of the mundus
muliebris, looking-glasses; and ii. from the gender of the
participle rendered by assembling — which is feminine. But
it is placed out of doubt by i Sam. ii. 33, where the very
same phrase occurs again, of the wom.en who assembled at
the door of the Tabernacle in Shiloh. The women then,
it seems, under the Tabernacle in the wilderness, could
assemble themselves, (and in troops or crowds,) at the door
of the Tabernacle ; but could they do so within the coui-t ?
for, if not, this assembling themselves at the door, in
e Exod. xxvii. i6., xxxviii. i8, cf Joseph. Ant. iii. vi. 2. f Exod. xxvii. i,,
xxxviii. I., xl. 29, cf Joseph. Ant. Jud. iii. vi. 8., viii. 6. S Exod. xl, 6,
cf 29 ; Jos. Ant. iii. vi. s, cf viii. iv, i.

22 Historical Character qf the Pentateuch, [quest, ii.
these instances, could never have meant any thing more than
their assembling themselves at the opening of the gate of the
court, always outside of it, however close to it, never within it.
ii. Numbers xii. 4. Moses and Aaron and Miriam are sum
moned to come forth (of the camp as such) to the Taber
nacle of the congregation. Moses and Aaron, in obedience
to this summons, might have presented themselves inside of
the court ; but is that conceivable of Miriam, a woman,
though of the tribe of Levi also ? And xii. 10, while Miriam
was standing where she was summoned to take her stand,
consequently either outside or inside the court, she was struck
with leprosy; yet nothing is said of putting her out of the
court, where no leprous person could have been permitted
to stand for a moment — nor after she was restored to herself,
of shutting her out from the eourt for such and such a length
of time, but only from the camp. Numb. xii. 14, 15, Deuteron.
xxiv. 9.
iii. Numb, xxvii. 3. the daughters of Zelophehad bring
their case before Moses and Eleazar, and the Princes, and
all the congregation, to the door of the Tabernacle. And
we may reason in this instance as before, that though Moses
and Eleazar might have been inside the court, could the
Princes of the people or the daughters of Zelophehad have
been so ? If not, to the door of the Tabernacle, in this in
stance also, means only to the opening of the gate of the
court — opposite indeed to the Tabernacle within the court,
but not inside the court. And the same may be said of
Josh. xix. 51, of the division of the lands, before Joshua,
Eleazar, and the heads of the tribes, at the door of the Taber
nacle ofthe congregation in Shiloh.
iv. But the clearest case, for the illustration of the dis
tinction in question, is that of the consecration of the Le
vites, Numbers viii. 9, 10. This ceremony, it is said, ver.
I4j i5j ™iist be undergone before they could enter on
their ministerial duties; and, for that purpose, both they
and the congregation were summoned first of all before the
Tabernacle, viii. 9, ao— one particular of the ceremony at
the consecration being this, that the Levites, (8580 in num
ber •>,) should pass one by one before the congregation, and
h Numb. iv. 48, cf 36, 40, 44.

quest. III.] Moses and Joshua. 23
the congregation should lay their hands upon them, viii. lo.
And that all this was intended to pass, and actually must
have passed, outside the court, must be inferrible from viii.
15, whieh specified beforehand that after all this should have
been done, the Levites should go in, to do the service of the
Tabernacle ; and from viii. aa, whicii relates historically,
that " after that went the Levites in, to do their service in
the Tabemacle." If they went in only after this consecra
tion, they must have been outside all the time it was going
on; and if they were outside all that time, much more the
rest of the people. The assembling of both, therefore, pre
liminary to the ceremony. Numb. viii. 9, before the Tabernacle,
could have meant nothing but their assembling in front of
the entrance of the court.

Question III. — Moses and Joshua addressing all Israel.
(Colenso, ch. v. pp. 35-37.)

(28,) The particulars recorded in the Book of Deuteronomy
appear to have taken up the space of one solar month of
thirty days exactly, from the first of the eleventh month, (the
first of Sebat,) in the fortieth year of the Exodus, Jan. 11,
B. C. 1530, to the first of the twelfth, (the first of Adar,)
Feb. 10, the day after the death of Moses '. They consist
almost entirely of the addresses, (speeches, as they would be
called in profane history,) of Moses himself, made to the
people in contemplation of his approaching death, and of
his final separation from them, at different times of the in
terval in question, the dates of which may be very probably
determined. (29.) With respect to all these addresses, and by way of
preliminary to the consideration of any such objection as that
which is stated in this Fifth Chapter of Dr. Colenso ; the
point to which the attention of the reader should first be
directed is that of the unity of the circumstances under
which, though distinct in themselves, they appear to have
> See my Fasti Catholici, ii. 206-212, and my Three Witnesses, 85, 86.

24 Historical Characler of the Pentateuch, [quest, in.
been delivered; first, the summoning together of the people,
(the whole of the people, all the congregation,) as if to heax
these addresses in common, and then, the addresses them
selves, so delivered on each of these occasions, as if expected
to be heard, and as if actually heard, by all in common. Dr.
Colenso (40-43) appears to have discovered an absurdity in
this representation, sufficient in his opinion to throw doubt
on its truth ; as if Moses could purposely have collected an
audience for these farewell addresses of his, a very great pro
portion of which could not have heard him, even if they
could have understood him, and could not have understood
him, even if they could have heard him.
(30.) But the question, in each of these instances, is not.
Who could hear Moses, or Who could understand Moses, on
these occasions ? but what Moses himself would be bound to
do, and what he might be expected to do, preliminary to
each ? Whether Moses, about to renew the Covenant of
Horeb, after a suspension of thirty-eight years, and -with the
children of those with whom it had been made originally,
(too young at that time to have taken a dehberate and re
sponsible part in it for themselves, but now grown up, and
constituting the whole of the congregation,) about to re
publish the Law by repeating and re-enacting most of its
injunctions, or to make it more intelligible by explaining
and qualifying some of its requisitions, or more complete
and perfect by adding and supplying what was still wanting
to its integrity — aware too of his own approaching depar
ture, and desirous to make an end of his personal ministry
among the people committed to his charge, with a series of
the most solemn, as well as the most earnest and affectionate,
exhortations to obedience, and perseverance in obedience, en
forced by every argument of encouragement or intimidation,
of hope or fear, which could have weight with rational and
responsible creatures — Whether Moses, I say, about to do all
this, would begin with calling together only that limited part
of the whole congregation, which was competent to hear, or
competent to understand, what he was going to say to them,
or every individual member of the whole congregation, man
or woman, old or young, high or low, down to the very in
fants and sucklings themselves, who had only an equal per-

QUEST. III.] Moses and Joshua. 25
sonal interest, (as every individual member of the people and
Church of God, -without respect to age or to sex, must have
had,) in what he was about to do or say.
(31.) In like manner, reading in the book of Joshua, viii.
30-35, of a similar occasion, where Joshua too is represented
to have recited the Book of the Law, (apparently as it was
left by Moses ^, and consequently in its totality,) in the first
year of the Eisodus, " Before all the congregation of Israel,
with the women, and the little ones, and the strangers that
were conversant among them," Dr. Colenso (41) in that re
presentation too discovers the same appearance of absurdity,
calculated a priori to discredit its truth ; as if Joshua could
reasonably be supposed to have summoned an audience toge
ther on purpose to hear him read something which so many
of them could not have understood, even if they had heard,
and still more could not have heard, even though they could
have understood.
(32.) But the question in this instance also is not What
part of the audience so called together was competent to hear
or to understand what was read, but what kind of an audience
Joshua was bound to call together, and might be expected to
call together, preliminary to sueh a ceremony as this, the
mo-ving cause of which was evidently the injunction recorded
Deuteron. xxvii. 1-8, 13-36, (cf. xi. 39, 30,) and the time pre
scribed for whieh might seem to have been the very day of
the passage of the Jordan, (Deut. xxvii. i, a,) and certainly
must have been intended to be some day, as soon after as
possible. Is it surprising that Joshua, ha-ving received such
a solemn charge as this from Moses himself, with the arrival of
the day of the delivery of the Law itself forty years before,
the fifth of Sivan in this first year of the Eisodus, as it had
been the fifth of Sivan in the first year of the Exodus — May
30, B.C. 1530, as it had been May 30, B.C. 1560 — :only fifty-
five days after the passage of the Jordan, Mareh 26, the same
year, (for this appears to have been the true time to which
this ceremony is determined by the course of events before
and after',) preparing on this day, the most proper of any
which could have been selected for such a purpose, both to
obey the injunction of Deut. xxvii. 1-8, ia-36, to the letter,
' Deuteron. xxxi. 24-26. ' Cf my Three Witnesses, 84, 85, loi.

26 Historical. Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, in.
and yet to rehearse the Law, which had been transmitted
to his keeping by Moses, in its totality also— should have
begun, as Moses himself had done under similar circum
stances only four months before, with caUing together not
those merely, who were competent to hear and to understand
him, but every individual member of the people, whether man
or woman, old or young, a native Israelite or a stranger, who
had any the least personal interest in the requisitions and in
junctions, the rewards or the punishments, the exhortations or
the warnings, the promises or the threatenings, of the Law
itself? (33.) But though I beheve that this is the tme explana
tion of the circumstances under which the whole of the Book
of Deuteronomy was delivered, and also of the circumstances
under which Josh. -viii. 34, 35, was done as recorded; I must
still enter a protest against the unfairness of the mode of the
reasoning which begins with assuming the thing which con
stitutes the absurdity, and then argues from it to the pre
judice of the historical account, as from an acknowledged fact.
Scripture, on the first of these occasions, Deut. i. i, says only,
" These le the words whieh Moses spake unto all Israel ; "
and on the seeond. Josh, viii. ^^, only " That there was not a
word of all that Moses commanded, which Joshua read not
before all the congregation of Israel." The truth of the
scriptural account is consequently answerable for nothing but
the fact of these addresses, on one of these occasions, and the
fact of this reading, on the other, under such and such cir
cumstances in each. As to the hearing or the understanding
of what was said or read, it leaves that to the common sense
of its readers; in the judgment of which it must be just as
absurd to suppose that nobody among those present could
have heard or understood what was spoken or read, as that
all could. It is self-evident that both Moses and Joshua
would be heard by those at least who stood next to them ;
and it is no straining of probability to suppose that these
in particular would be those who were not only the most
competent to understand, but the most concerned to hear,
and to remember what they heard, the Priests and Levites,
the elders of the people, the heads of the tribes, the captains
of thousands, the captains of hundreds, the captains of fifties.

QUEST. IV.] Camp, and Duties of the Priests. 27
and the captains of tens". It is still more e-vident to com
mon sense, that few as might have been competent to hear
either Moses or Joshua on those occasions, there could have
been none who were not competent to see him ; and few who,
if they saw him, were not competent to know what he was
doing, and what it was which had brought them together,
to hear or to see him.
(34.) Dr. Colenso's rule of judging ofthe credibility ofthe
Scripture accounts in these two instances, amounts substan
tially to this ; That in the record of things spoken, (of which
ancient history is just as full as of things done,) nothing
which is related to have been said to, or in the presence of, a
given audience, is to be believed as actually so said, if the
audience was too great to have heard it. The human voice,
it may safely be assumed, is physically incapable of being
heard and understood within a compass of sound and space
greater than would be filled by an audience of lo, or i3,ooo.
How many harangues of the generals of antiquity to their
soldiers, and how many speeches of the orators or demagogues
of Greek or Roman history, would this test and criterion of
truth or falsehood strike out of the page of history, and set
down to the score of fable !

Question IV. — The Extent ofthe Camp, compared with the
Priesfs Duties.
(Colenso, ch. vi. pp. 38-40.)

(35.) There was a particular description x>f sacrifices under
the Law, (those which were styled sin offerings,) the disposal
of which was peculiar — the blood indeed being offered, as
usual in all other cases also, on the altar of incense or altar
of burnt offerings — but the bodies of the victims, with every
thing appertaining to them in their natural state, being burnt
without the camp"". The true reason of this distinction, though
at the time a secret and mysterious one, is probably to be
" Exod. xviii. 25 : Deuteron. i. 15. " Cf. Exod. xxix. 14: Lev. iv.
II, 12-21 : vi. 25: viii, 17: xvi. 27: cf, Numb. xix. 3-5.

28 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, iv
divined from Heb. xiii. 11-13 ; from which it may be inferred
that this class of offerings under the Law had a special rela
tion to the one great sin offering, the sacrifice of our Lord
and Saviour Jesus Christ, which also like these was offered
efo) rrjs 7rapefxi3o\^s, or " without the camp."
(36.) On this point too Dr. Colenso, upon his own assump
tions, has raised a question, and consequentially deduced an
absurdity, chargeable on Scripture, and obtained, as he terms
it (45), by " looking plain facts in the face." And these
assumptions are, i. That it was the duty of the Priest, who
disposed of the blood of these sin offerings, to dispose of the
bodies of the victims also ; and therefore to carry them himself
from the quarter where they were to be slain, the Tabernacle,
to the quarter where they were to be burnt. Without the
camp. ii. That the site of the Tabernacle was always within
the camp, and the magnitude of the camp, at the least esti
mate of it, was three miles square, if not, (as he himself is
more inclined to believe,) even twelve miles square (44, 45).
Laying these assumptions together, he has no difficulty in
drawing the inference that, as often as a sacrifice of this kind
was offered under the Tabernacle in the Wildemess, it was the
duty of the Priest (Aaron or one of his sons) to carry the
body of the -victim, and every thing belonging to it, in its
natural state, on his own lack, a distance certainly of three
quarters of a mile (44), and possibly even of six miles (45); to
find a place, where it could be burnt, -without the camp.
(37.) Both these assumptions are mistaken in point of fact ;
though the mistake in the first instance is of no consequence
to the present question. It is a mistake to suppose that such
simply servile duties of the ministry of the Priests under the
Law, as that of the disposal of the bodies of these victims in
this particular way, were incumbent on the Priests themselves.
It ignores the fact that the Levites were made over to them
in perpetuity, to relieve them from such services, as well as
for other reasons ; and if any one will turn to the texts which
seem to enjoin these services on the Priests themselves, he
will see that the verb, which is rendered by " shall carry
forth," is just as capable of being rendered " shall cause to be
carried forth." There were. Levites enow (see 37. iv. supra)
at this very time, under the Tabernacle, while there were yet

quest. IV.] Camp, and Duties ofthe Priests. 29
only three Priests, to have rendered the performance of this
duty, even on Dr. Colenso's hypothesis of the site of the
Tabernacle, and of the dimensions of the camp, so far as
niunbers were concerned, a feasible one.
(38.) But with respect to this hypothesis itself— the size of
the camp, for the present, may be treated as indifferent also.
It makes very little difference to the resulting absurdity,
whether the size of the camp was three miles square, or twelve
miles square, if the Tabernacle was really situated in the
midst of it. The assumption which vitiates the reasoning in
this Sixth Chapter of Dr. Colenso's all through, and false
itself, leads, as was natural, to conclusions equaUy false, is
that of the site of the Tabernacle. And to this question I
shall confine myself for the rest of my observations on this
chapter, reserving that of the size of the camp for a future
opportunity. (39.) Now the only part of the Pentateuch, from the begin
ning of Exodus to the end of Deuteronomy, in which there is
any distinct and formal reference to the site of the Tabernacle,
is Exod. xxxiii. 'J-'ii ; and that is so clear, and 'so much to
the purpose, that one cannot but be surprised. it should have
been totaUy overlooked, as it appears to have been, by Dr.
Colenso. Let us begin with producing this passage, as its
importance on the present question deserves.
(40.) Exod. xxxiii. 7 : " And Moses took the tabernacle, and
pitched it without the camp, afar off from the camp, and called
it the Tabernacle ofthe congregation. And it came to pass
that every one which sought the Loed, went out unto the
tabernacle of the congregation, which was without the camp.
ver. 8, And it came to pass, when Moses went out unto the
tabernacle, that all the people rose up, and stood every man at
his tent door, and looked after Moses, until he was gone into
the tabernacle, ver. 9, And it came to pass, as Moses entered
into the tabemacle, the cloudy pdlar descended, and stood at
the door of the tabernacle, and the Lord talked with Moses.
ver. 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 in his tent door. ver. 11, And the
Loed spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto
his friend. And he turned again into the camp : but his

30 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, iv.
servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not
out of the tabernacle."
(41.) The first remark which may be made on this account is,
That it cannot possibly be considered historical, that is, an ac
count of something done at this time, between Exod. xxxiii. 6,
and 13, — on the day apparently of the descent from the
Mount, after the first forty days passed there" ; the date of
which, as I have shewn P, was July i6 in the first year of the
Exodus, B.C. 1560 : at which time, though all the directions
had already been given for the construction of the Tabernacle 9,
the Tabemacle itself was not yet even begun to be budt — nor
was so, under forty-five or fifty days after at least ; nor finished
much before the last day ofthe year, March 36, B.C. 1559''.
But if it is not historical where it stands, it must be an
anticipation of its historical time and place, parentheticaUy
interposed in the account of the worship of the golden calf ;
justified no doubt by the circumstances of the case, and pos
sibly for some reason, arising out of that first defection itself.
Be this however as it may, yet as the account of the site of
the Tabernacle, relatively to the camp, so circumstantially
and minutely interposed here, eight or nine months before the <
existence of the Tabernacle itself — and never referred to again
— ^we are justified in arguing from it that this description of
the site of the Tabemacle, relatively to the camp, is given
here once for all j and often as it might be taken down and set
up again, after it came into existence, it was always pitched,
relatively to the general encampment, as here described.
(42.) Now it is clear from this description, i. (xxxiii. 7) that
the Tabernacle must have been pitched at a distance fi-om the
camp, and a good distance too, afar from the camp (cf. Numb.
ii. 3), and that anj' of the congregation, who had occasion to
go to the Tabernacle, must go, for that purpose, in the first
instance, out of the camp. ii. From xxxiii. 8-10, that the
Tabernacle was so situated relatively to the camp, that its
forefront faced the camp, and all who were left in the camp,
when Moses went to the Tabernacle out of the camp, standing
at their tent doors, could follow him with theii- eyes until he
entered the Tabernacle itself; and the cloudy pillar, which
" Exod. xxiv. 18— xxxi. 18: xxxii. i — xxxiii. 6. P Three Witnesses 91;.
149-151. 1 Exod. xxv. I — xxxi. II. r Exod. xxxv. 4 — xxxix, 43 : xl. 2V

QUEST. IV.] Camp, ami Duties of the Priests. 31
descended on such occasions and stood at the door of the
Tabernacle, could also be seen from their tent doors by the
people in the camp. And this is confirmed by Numb. xvi. 43,
a case in point, the day after the judgment infiicted on Korah,
Dathan, Abiram, and their company, more than a year after
the present time, in a totally different quarter; proving de
monstratively that the relative position of the Tabernacle aud
the camp then and there was stdl the same as at first.
iii. That there was a vacant space, (and no small space too,)
in the first instance, between the Tabernacle and the camp, is
clearly to be collected from the above description ; and that
there was ever after a standing distance between them may be
inferred from the account of the ordination of the seventy
elders, in the seeond year of the Exodus, soon after the arrival
at Taberah, just before the second miracle of quails. Two of
these elders, Eldad and Medad (Numb. xi. 36), having been
left in the camp, while the rest were with Moses at the door
of the Tabernacle, and ha-ving begun to prophesy there at the
same time as the rest where they were, a young man, it is
said (ver. 37) J ran to tell Moses of this fact ; whieh implies that
he was somewhere out of the camp, while Eldad and Medad
were in it, and somewhere a good way off too. It may be in
ferred also from the case of Moses, Aaron, and Miriam, con
sidered supra (37. ii.) Miriam was not in the court of the
Tabernacle, when she was struck with leprosy, and yet she
was not in the camp. Numb. xii. 4. 14, 15. Where could she
have been then, but somewhere between the Tabernacle and
the camp ? If so, there must have been a vacant space be
tween the court of the Tabernacle and the camp. And all
these inferences to that effect, thus obtained, are confirmed in
the last place by the final end of the appointment of sueh a
space from the first; viz. that there might be at first, and
ever after, a clear and unoccupied extent of ground, between
the general camp and the Tabernacle of the congregation, in
the sense of the court, large enough to admit of the assem
bling of the congregation upon it, as often as there should be
occasion, in front of the eourt.
(43.) Moreover, as the front of the Tabernacle evidently
faced the camp, it may be collected from the above description
that the Tabernacle and the camp lay west and east of each

3^ Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, iv.
other. And as it appears from Numb. iii. 38, that of the par
ticular encampments of the Levites, round about the Taber
nacle — one on each of the cardinal points respectively — ^the
camp on the east was that of Moses and Aaron, and the sons
of Aaron, it follows that this camp, lying east of the Taber
nacle, must have lain west of the camp of the Israelites, and
the general camp of the Israelites east of this camp in par
ticular. (44.) The reader of course will understand that when I speak
of the camp, thus pitched due east of the Tabernacle, and at a
stated distance from it, I mean the camp described and laid
down in Numb. ii. This camp was never pitched round about
the Tabernacle, nor the Tabernacle ever in the midst of this
camp. There was another camp, described and divided as at
Numb. i. 50, 53, 53 : iii. 31-33 : 37-39 : 33-35 : 38— which
was pitched round the Tabernacle, or rather the court of the
Tabernacle, and in the midst of which the Tabernacle erected
always stood. But this was the camp of the Le-vites, scarcely
a twelfth part as large as the other; and at tliis time com
prehending no more at the utmost than 33,000 x 3, or 44,000
souls. I admit too that, though the place of the Tabernacle
standing was never in the midst of any camp but this, the
place of the Tabernacle taken down was in the midst of the
general camp, described as appointed Numb. ii. 3-9 : 10-16 :
18-34: 35-31, between the second and the third of these.
Numb. ii. 17: cf. iv. 5-15 : 17-30 : 34-38 : 31-33. But this
was the camp on the march ; and this place of the Tabernacle
in that camp was the place of the Tabemacle on the march
also — i. e. of the Tabemacle taken down, and existing only in
its materials ; destitute also for the time of the visible symbol
of its proper inhabitant, the cloudy pillar, which on such oc
casions did not precede the Tabemacle, but the marching-
camp. (45.) To revert then to the original question, the disposal
of the bodies of the sin offerings, and the particular injimction
of carrying and burning them out of the camp. After the
preceding explanation, that this could not have meant out of
the camp of the congregation — except in the sense of external
to it, somewhere or other — must be self-evident. And as
external simply to this camp, relatively to the site of the

QUEST, v.] First Muster, and Poll-taw. 33
Tabernacle, any clean spot, outside the eourt and outside the
camp also, would have satisfied the conditions of the injunc
tion. And to suppose it meant of the camp of the Levites, —
outside of that, relatively to the Tabernacle, must have meant
outside of the camp on the east, whieh only was next to the
gate of the court ; and as that consisted simply of the tents of
Moses, and Aaron, and the two sons of Aaron, in particular, to
step out of the court of the Tabernacle, was almost to step out
of this camp too. What then could be easier, as often as there
was occasion, than to find a clean place, a few yards only dis
tant from the gate of the court, for the disposal of these sacri
fices in particular, and both without the gate and without the
camp at once ?
Question V. — The Numler qf the people at the first muster,
compared with the Poll-taw raised siw months previously.
(Colenso, ch. vii. pp. 41-44.)

(46.) The first difficulty raised on this point is this — Exod.
xxx. 11-16 an injunction occurs, (which, for any thing whieh
appears to the contrary in its own intimations, might have
been intended for a particular case of the kind, shortly expected
to arrive, as much as for general observance in all future cases
of the same kind,) that whensoever the numbers of the con
gregation should be taken, a tax should be levied, in the shape
of the half shekel of the sanctuary, on each individual male,
above the age of twenty, as the redemption-price of his soul.
And after this, Exod. xxxviii. 35-38, on the one hand, we
read of a poll -tax, whieh had already been levied and paid,
evidently in obedience to the above injunction, some time or
other before that allusion to it, yet we read of no numbering as
having preceded or accompanied it also. And Numb. i. 1—46,
on the other hand, we read of a numbering of the people, the
most formal and complete of its kind imaginable ; yet we read
of no poll-tax or redemption-money, which might have been
expected, in obedience to the above injunction, to have accom
panied it. And besides all this, on comparing Exod. xxxviii.
36 with Numb. i. 46, we see that the number of those who
paid the redemption-money, and the number of those who

34 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, v.
went to the census, from the same age upwards in each, were
precisely the same, 603,550.
(47.) From these coincidences, it seems to be only a natural
inference that both these occasions must -virtually at least, if not
actually, have been the same ; and Dr. Colenso's mode of ex
plaining and rendering them consistent (47) is to suppose that
the numbering took place on the first occasion, and the poU-tax
was levied on the second — though neither is mentioned in its
proper order of time. In this explanation I cannot concur.
But we may draw this inference from it, as proposed by Dr.
Colenso himself, that in his opinion there was no necessary
connection between the holding of a census at a given time,
and the payment of its proper redemption-tax, at the same
time — that a census might be held at a certain time, and yet
its proper poll-tax not be levied until some time after. In
this opinion I fully concur. And it is on this supposition of
no necessary connection between the time of a payment of
this kind and that of the occasion out of which it became due,
that I hope to explain all the inconsistency in this respect
which seems to exist between Exod. xxx. 11— 16, or Exod.
xxxviii. 35-38, and Numb. i. 1—46. And it is but an acci
dental enlargement of the application, -without any change in
^e principle, of that explanation, to assume that as a stated
payment of this kind might be deferred in a particular in
stance for some time after it became due, so it might be anti
cipated in a particular instance some time lefore it became
due. (48.) In my opinion it would be only a natural inference
from Exod. xxxviii. 35, 36, that the numbering there aUuded
to and the payment of the half shekel, also recognized, took
place on different occasions; though whether the payment
before the numbering, or the numbering before the payment,
could not certainly be inferred from it. Let us therefore proceed
to consider the injunction at Exod. xxx. 11-16. i. I have
already observed upon it, that to judge from its own lan
guage and its own testimony, it might have had in -view a
particular case of numbering, shortly expected to arrive, as
much as not. It is as capable therefore of being understood
to refer to the numbering. Numb, i, 1-46 — which shortly
after took place, as to any thing of the same kind in the

QUEST, v.] First Muster, and Poll-ta.v, 35
future history of the people, foreseen and provided for be
forehand by such an injunction as this. And to judge from
the language of verse 16, which specifies the mode of apply
ing the money so raised, in obedience to this command, on
any occasion for whieh it might be considered intended — no
such money could ever have been more literally so applied, in
and upon the ser-vice of the sanctuary, than the money whieh
might have been thus raised from such a numbering as that
at Numb. i. 1-46.
(49.) But ii. be this as it may, the next observation which
may be made upon this injunction is that it comes in in the midst
of a context, before and after, in which, without some special
reason, it was not to have been expected — -viz. in the midst of
the account of the materials and construction of the Taber
nacle, Exod. xxv. 3 — xxxix. 43. But iii. it comes in where
it does, between the directions relating to the Tabernacle, (or
Messican, as such,) including its court, and the several com
ponent parts of each, Exod. xxv. 3 — xxvii. 3i and xxx. i-io
(cf. xxx. 17-31, xxxviii. i-3o), and the directions relating to
the clothes of ser-vice for the ministering Priests, Exod. xxviii.
I — xxix. 30 (cf. xxxix. 1-31, xxxv. 11-19). iv. I observe,
-with regard to the use of the money (or silver), so raised
in obedience to Exod. xxx. 11— 16, for the service of the Ta
bernacle — it was all appUed to the use of a particular por
tion of the Tabernacle ; i. e. Exod. xxxviii. 37, a8, partly in
making sockets for the sanctuary, and sockets for the vail,
(ef. xxvi. 15-37, xxxv. 11-15, xxx-vi. 30—30, 35-38^ xl. 18.
38,) and partly in making hooks and fillets for the pillars at
the entrance, and partly in overlaying them. v. Such being
the use to which this money was actually applied, if it may
only be assumed on the strength of that fact, that such must
have been the use for whieh it was intended from the first, we
want no other reason to account for the interposition of the
injunction, Exod. xxx. 11-16, relating to it, where it actually
comes in, in the midst of the account of the construction of
the Tabernacle itself. There was no reason a priori why a
poll-tax, due from every one at an approaching numbering,
and due to the sanctuary, if the service of the sanctuary
required it, might not be levied lefore the numbering, and
simply in anticipation of the numbering. Dr, Colenso, as we
D 3

36 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest. V.
have seen, makes no difficulty in supposing the numbering
held at one time, and its proper poU-tax levied at another.
And this is the principle on whieh, in my opinion, the sepa
ration of the poll-tax Exod. xxviii. 36 from its proper census
Numb. i. 1-46, in this instance, is both to be explained and
defended ; viz. that the silver, the expected proceeds of this
numbering, and due to the sanctuary whenever it should be
paid, was wanted for a pui-pose in the construction of the
Tabernacle, which eould not wait for the numbering — which
would require the payment to be anticipated, if the Taber
nacle was to be completed before the numbering was to take
place. (50.) And this brings us to the question of the time when
it would be most likely to be so anticipated, in order to be so
applied — and whether, as Dr. Colenso supposes (47), six
months before it would become due, or possibly something
much less. On this question, the natural judgment of com
mon sense would be, that if the poll-tax was to be levied
beforehand for the service of the Tabernacle, it would most
probably be levied when it vvas wanted, and not a moment
before, any more than after, it began to be wanted. And
we may judge of the time when it began to be wanted, from
the use which was actually made of it, Exod. xxxviii. 37, 38,
after it was raised — and the period in the building or con
struction of the Tabemacle, with which that must have coin
cided; i. e. evidently towards the end ofthe whole interval so
taken up, and when nothing remained to be completed even
of the a-^iov Koo[t.iKov itself, but the clothes of the ministering
Priests, Exod. xxxix. 1-31.
(51.) Now though the precise time, when the Tabernacle
began to be built, or the precise time when it was finished,
is not specified in Scripture, an idea may be formed of the
former from the fact that it must have been at least forty, or
even fifty, days later than the first forty days spent on the
Mount; that is, forty or even fifty days later than July 16,
B.C. 1560 (41): and an idea may be formed of the latter
ti'om the fact that, all being now ready, the Tabernacle itself
was set up on the first day of the first month of the New
Calendars, (the first of the second Abib of the Exodus,)
s Exod. xl. I . (. f, my Three Witnesses, 80 sqq.

QUEST. V.J First Muster, and Poll-ta.r. 37
Mareh 37, B.C, 1559. It may be assumed therefore with
great probability that the whole of the time, taken up by
the constraction of the Tabernacle, could not have been much
less than the interval from the 13th ofthe sixth month of the
New Calendar, (the lath of Elul,) September 4, B.C. 1560,
to the first of the first month, (Abib,) March 37, B C. 1559 ;
and consequently that the time, when the last part of the
work was most likely to be in hand, and therefore the poll-tax
on the expected census, if wanted for this, was most likely
to be anticipated, must have been one or two months before
March 37, B.C. 1559.
(52.) It is here to be observed that to have held the census
any time during the continuance of the work on the Taber
nacle, might have interfered materially with its progress;
and if it must be deferred until the Tabernacle was finished,
it must be put off to the end of the 13th month at least.
Nor could it have been conveniently held in the first month,
March 37 to April 36, B.C. 1559 — devoted as that was to
the setting up and dedication of the Tabernacle, the conse
cration of Aaron and his sons to the Priesthood, (an eight days
ceremony,) and after these, to all the other particulars, besides
the Passover, as recorded Numb, vii— ix. 1-5. The census
itself must have been a work of time, including as it did a
previous inquiry into every man's genealogy. Numb. i. 18
(603,550 in all) — but the levying of a poll-tax, even on every
male adult in the whole congregation, might have been soon
despatched, especially with a congregation so organised and
digested as that of the Israelites at this time. All that was
necessary to that end and purpose would seem to have been,
that the rulers of tens should first collect the tax from each of
their ten, (as they might all do at once,) and then hand over
the sum to the rulers of fifties — and that the rulers of fifties
should hand over what they had received to the rulers of
hundi-eds, and the rulers of hundreds in like manner to the
rulers of thousands, and the rulers of thousands last of all to
Moses and Aaron — and the whole business would have been
done, and for ought which we can see to the contrary, almost
in a single day. We need not hesitate therefore to infer that,
if this levying of the poll-tax, in anticipation of the number-

38 Historical Character of the Pentateuch. [quest, v.
ing, was necessary for the last part of the work of the Taber
nacle, it was probably going on some time in the eleventh
month, Jan. 31— Feb. 30, B. C. 1559.
(53.) And this brings us to the second difficulty raised by
Dr. Colenso on this subject (47), -viz. how it could have hap
pened that, supposing an interval of six months between the
numbering of the people and the payment of the tax, the
number of adult males should have been identically the same
on the first occasion as it was half a year afterwards, 603,550
on each. Instead of six months between the two occasions,
I have shewn there was in all probability not more than two
or three months ; and every one must allow it to be possible
that all who were alive and well, when the poll-tax was levied
upon them, might be alive and well when they went to the
numbering, only two or three months afterwards.
(54.) But some, it might be said, even in this case, must
have been born between the levying of the tax and the num
bering, who would be included in the census ; or some must
have attained to the age of twenty between the two, who
would be included in the numbering, though not in the tax.
To the first of these objections we may reply that, if any were
born in this interval, they must have been born a month at
least before the census, to be included in that ; and conse
quently, if the numbering was held in the second month,
April 36 — May 36, B. C. 1559, these births must have hap
pened between the middle of the eleventh month, Feb. 4,
(when the poll-tax was probably levied,) and the end of the
epagomense, March a6 ; and the only interval open to these
births, after the poll-tax and before the census, would be the
fifty-one days from Feb. 4 to March 37, this year.
(55.) To both these objections we may reply, that each is
precluded in the present instance by a fact of great import
ance on such a question as this, and hitherto totally unkno-wn
to aU commentators on Scripture ; the truth of which however
has been fuUy estabUshed, I hope, by the necessary proofs, in
my Origines Kalendariae Hellenicse — the fact of the celebration
of marriages, at this period of the history of the world, every
where, at one and the same time — all the marriages of the
year in one and the same month of the year, and that the

QUEST, v.] First Muster, and Poll-tax. 39
first month of the year. And nowhere does this custom of
private and public life appear to have been more generally
observed, than in Egypt*. The stated month of all the
marriages in the year being thus by ancient rule and cus
tom the first month of the calendar, the stated month of
the births of the first year, in the ordinary course of things,
would be the tenth month. And ha-ving this datum to
proceed upon, we may easily calculate that the stated month
of the births of the seeond year, generally speaking, would
be the ninth; that of those of the third, the eighth, and
that of those of the fourth, the seventh. But if the num
ber of children from these marriages, on an average, could not
be estimated at more than four, it could seldom happen that
births in one and the same family would fall out as early as
the sixth month.
(56.) Now the Primitive Calendar, as we shall see here
after"^, having been corrected, for the use of the Israelites, by
the Deity himself, on the eve of the Exodus, and the seventh
month of the old calendar having been constituted the first
of the new — the sixth of the old must have answered to the
twelfth of the new — and no births, in one and the same family,
and one and the same line of descent, from marriages cele
brated in the first month of the old calendar, (the seventh ofthe
new,) being ever to be expected in the ordinary course of
things in the sixth month of the old calendar, much less in
any earUer month — none could be expected at this time
in the twelfth of the new, much less in any earlier month.
None therefore could have been born between the poU-tax, at
the middle of the eleventh month of the new calendar, the
fifth of the old, and the numbering, in the second month of
the new calendar, the eighth of the old, who could have
been more than a month old at the time of the numbering —
nor very possibly any, who were under the age of twenty at
the former, have yet attained to that age by the latter.
(57.) I will conclude these observations with a brief notice
of a cursory remark of Dr. Colenso's on the use of the phrase,
" Shekel of the Sanctuary," Exod, xxx. 13. This phrase, it
appears to him (46), " could hardly have been used in this
t Origines Kai. HeU. vi. 568-619. " Cf my Three Witnesses, 80 sqq.

40 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, vi.
way, until there was a Sanctuary in existence, or rather until
the Sanctuary had been some time in existence, and such a
phrase had become familiar in the mouths of the people."
He has overlooked the fact that this Sanctuary was first
alluded to, and the buUding thereof enjoined, so long before
as Exod. xxv. 8 — and that the same Divine Person, who first
spoke of it at that time and ordered it to be built, was speak
ing of it here again, in this aUusion to the coin or weight,
which from the time when it came into existence was to be
peculiar to it, and characteristic of it. Under such circum
stances the allusion to the " Shekel of the Sanctuary" here
is virtually as much retrospective, and in reference to some
thing even then supposed to be in existence, as any of those
numerous instances of the same kind of allusion, of later
date, whicii occur in the Pentateuch".

Question W.— The Sojourning ofthe Israelites in Egypt.
(Colenso, ch. xv. pp- 91— 95)

(58.) The various matters of fact, discussed in the xvth, the
xvith, the xviith, and the xviiith and xixth chapters of Dr.
Colenso's work — the diffieulties raised in them — and the
explanations which may be given of them — these in pai-ti-
cular are no new questions, first suggested by this book of
Dr. Colenso's. They have been subjects of controversy ever
since there was a Bible history, proposed for beUef on the one
hand, yet open to attack and criticism on the other. And
possibly it may appear to most of my readers that, as there
is nothing new in this class of objections at present, so there
can be nothing new in the answers which may be expected to
be returned to them. I hope however that what may still be
said on these pai-ticular questions, with the blessing of God
upon it, may have its effect in satisfying the doubts of every
unprejudiced inquirer, and yet not appear to have been anti
cipated. X Levit. xxvii. 25 (cf 3) : Numb. iii. 47. 50: vii. 13. 19. ;=;, 31. ,7, 4, ,q.
55- 61.67. 73. 79. 85, 86: xviii. 16. => J ^ ,•< .-/ -td -ly

quest. VI.] Sojourn in Egypt. 41
(59.) Let us however proceed systematically, and take
each of these questions in its natural order, beginning with
that of the Sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt.
The testimony of St. Paul ^ in my opinion is, or ought to
be, decisive that between the first distinct promise of the
Future Seed, made to Abraham, and the publication of the
Law, it was always intended there should be, and in fact
there was, an interval of 430 years. And this first express
prediction, as I have shewn in my Fasti Catholici^, having
been that which is recorded Gen. xii. 7, and referred to Acts
vii. 5, — Unto thy seed -wiU I give this land — when, as the
Holy Martyr himself subjoined, as yet he had no child — and
the date of the delivery of the Law being necessarily de
terminable to B.C. 1560, it foUows that, on St. Paul's autho
rity, the date of this first promise must be determinable to
B. C. 1990. Nor, as I have argued more at large in my Fasti
CathoUci ", is any thing discoverable in the context of events,
before or after, why it might not be very probably conjectured
that the day, on which this promise was given, was the very
day on which it was afterwards fulfiUed by the birth of the
Promised Seed itself, April 5 **.
(60.) Abram or Abraham then, though called in Haran,
Gen. xii. 1-7, being already in Canaan, in obedience to the
caU, on or soon after April 5, B. C. 1990; it is very observa
ble that the only particular recorded of this first year of his
sojourn in Canaan is the course of the joumey, which ulti
mately brought him to Egypt — first to Sichem and the plain of
Moreh, Gen. xii. 6, then to the mountain between Bethel on
the west, and Hai on the east (ver. 8,) — and then, onwards
stUl to the south, untd he came to Egypt, ver. 9, 10. It is
observable also that the moving cause of so early a -visit to
Egypt, after he had once come into Canaan, Gen. xii. 10, was
a famine or dearth, and " a grievous" famine too, that same
year in the land of Canaan itself. It is needless to add that
this -visit to Egypt — thus early produced after his coming into
Canaan — was followed by a sojourn of his, whether for a longer
or for a shorter time, in Egypt itself.
(61.) Now it is equally worthy of note, that though this
z Gal. iii. 17. " ii. 192, 193. •> Cf my Three Witnesses, 89-98.

42 Historical Character of the Pentateuch. [quest, vi.
visit to, and this sojourn in, Egypt of Abraham's, have been
left on record thus early in the history of his call, nothing of
the same kind is again upon record in his own history, nor in
that of the patriarchs after him, between his call into Canaan
and the Descent of the entire family of his posterity in the
time of Jacob, preparatory to the formation of the nation of
the Israelites itself in that country. On the contrary, when
Isaac, the next in succession, for the very same reason which
took Abraham to Egypt on the former occasion, (the occur
rence of another famine of the same kind. Gen. xxvi. i,)
having already migrated southward from the well Lahai-roi
(xxv. ii) to Gerar, in the country ofthe Philistines, if left
to himself would evidently have gone on to Egypt also, we read
Gen. xxvi. 3. that God interfered on purpose to prevent it,
and to command him to think of sojourning nowhere, whether
for a longer or a shorter time, which he should not himself
tell him of; and for the present to continue to sojourn where
he was.
Now, why was this, except, as I briefly observed in my
Fasti ", with a prospective regard to the truth of the state
ment, which occurs Exod. xii. 40, 41, and to preclude all
possibility of mistake and confusion with respect to the epoch
of that 430 years' sojourning — whether from that visit to, and
that sojourn in, Egypt of Abraham's in the very first year of
his call, or from this visit of Isaac's, if it had been allowed to
take place, so long after ? It requires no argument to prove
that, if Isaac too had gone down to, and resided whether for
a longer or a shorter time in, Egypt on this occasion, there
must have been just the same reason a priori to date the
sojourning, Exod. xii. 40, 41, from his visit, as from that of
Abraham ; or rather, with sueh a fact on record in the history
of Isaac as much as in that of Abraham, the caviller, who
was disposed to except to the ehronology of Scripture, and to its
rule of reckoning, in this instance, would not have wanted a
specious pretext for contending that, if the sojourn of the
chUdren or seed of Abraham in Egypt was not to be reckoned
from their actual Descent in B. C. 1778, it eould be reckoned
with so much propriety from no epoch as from that of this
sojourn in Egypt of Isaac, the first of the seed of Abraham
<= ii. TO"", notp 7,.

QUEST, VI.] Sojourn in Egypt. 43
who either was, or could have been, literally, and in his
own person, a resident in Egypt.
(62.) It is no objection to this view of the final end of this
first event in the personal history of Abraham, after his call
into Canaan, which makes it to have had a Providential re
gard to the truth of Exod. xii. 40, 41, of the sojourning of the
children of Israel in Egypt before the Exodus, that at the
time of this visit to, and sojourn in, Egypt of Abraham's, he
had as yet no son. In the Divine apprehension of the con
neetion of fathers and children, not only Isaac and Jacob, and
the Twelve Patriarchs, but the whole nation of the IsraeUtes,
stdl unborn, went down with Abraham on this occasion ; just
as in the same apprehension of the same relations, all the
posterity of Adam, all his descendants, and in all quarters of
the earth, from that day to this, at the time of the Fall were
summed up in the loins of Adam, and concurred -with Adam
in that first act of transgression, and became obnoxious to a
share with Adam in the penal consequences of that act; or just
as, according to Scripture itself d, the Sacerdotal Tribe and
Family under the Law, which received tithes from the rest
under the Law, paid tithes themselves to a superior Priest
hood, along -with Abraham their father, who did so.
(63.) On this principle the true beginning of the sojourn
ing of the seed of Abraham in Egypt, according to the Di-vine
Chronology of the course of things, and the Divine apprehen
sion of their interdependencies on one another, was this
beginning of the sojourning there of Abraham himself in the
first year of his call, B. C. 1990; from which consequently to
B. C. 1560, the year of the delivery of the Law, the inter
val could not have been less than 430 years, complete or
current. And I entirely agree with Dr. Colenso (100) that
the words of Exod. xii. 40 in the original should have been
rendered in the English version, " Now the sojourning of the
children of Israel, which they sojourned in Egypt," rather
than, " Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who
dwelt in Egypt ;" the former compatible with the sojourning
of Abraham in Egypt, B. C. 1990, reckoned as vu-tually the
beginning of that of his posterity, the latter, strictly so only
with their own, in its literal and historical acceptation, dated
from B.C, 1778. i Hebrews, vii. 9, 10.

44 Historical Character of the Pentateuch. [quest, vi.
(64.) It is very observable however that, as the producing
cause of this first Descent along -with Abraham, B. C. 1990,
was a famine in Canaan, so that of this literal and historical
Descent, B. C. 1778, was a famine in the same country also;
and to judge from the context of circumstances, before and
after each, the time of the year of the Descent on each occa
sion must appear to have been much the same, — the end of
the summer, or the beginning of the autumnal, quarter in each
instance. It is further observable that, as we should be justi
fied in inferring from Hosea xi. i, compared with Exod. iv.
33, 33, and Matt. ii. 15, that this Descent to, and Sojoum in,
Egypt of the Typical First-born of God, in the sense of the
children of Abraham, must have had a concealed reference to
the future Descent to, and future Residence in, that country
of the true First-born Son of God, so, it has been shewn in
my Dissertations on the Principles and Arrangement of an
Harmony of the Gospels ', that the actual time of the year of
the Descent of the Holy famdy also was probably the same,
the end of the summer, or the beginning of the autumnal,
quarter, and mutatis mtotandis the probable length of their
residence there was the same too.
(65.) From the beginning then of the Sojourn of Abraham in
I^gypt;! August or September, B.C. 1990, to the Exodus ofthe
Israelites, April 10, B. C. 1560, the interval could not have
been less than 439 years, seven or eight months. From the
beginning of the Sojourn of Jacob with his family in Egypt,
August or September, B. C. 1778, to the Exodus, the interval
could not have been less than 317 years, seven or eight
months. The former, in the idiom of Seripture, could not be
reckoned at less than 430 years ; nor the latter at less than
3)8. For the verification then of Exod. xii. 40, 41, and as
reckoned by the standard of the Divine apprehension of
events and their proper times, the period of the sojourniag in
Egypt must be reckoned at 430 yeai-s ; for the explanation of
the increase of the Tribes, the period of the sojourn, as the
period of the formation of the nation, in Egypt, can be
reckoned at neither more nor less than 2 1 7 or 3 1 8 years.
° Vol. i. p. 39,, ,92; and note; ii. 141-147. Prolegomena ad Hannoniam,
182-iSi.

QUEST. VII.] Exodus in the fourth Generation. 45
Question VII. — The Exodus in the fourth Generation.
(Colenso, ch. xvi. pp. 96-101.)

(66.) Let us now proceed to the question of the Exodus in
the fourth generation.
The predicted return of the posterity of Abraham, from
some quarter, where they are supposed to have been sojourn
ing meanwhile, to the land of promise, in the fourth genera
tion, is part of the prophecy recorded Gen. xv. 13-16; one
of the circumstances of the fifth, and the most remarkable, of
the manifestations of God to Abraham, because that at which
the Covenant of Promise was formally entered into -with him.
The date of this appearance, as I shewed in my Fastif, was
probably April 5, the year after his visit to Egypt, the seeond
year ofhis call into Canaan, B.C. 1989.
(67.) The first observation which may be made on this pre
diction in general is that, ver. 13, it supposes the seed of
Abraham already in being ; though, if its date was April 5,
B.C. 1989, and that ofthe birth of Isaac (the first to whom
this allusion could have been strictly applicable) was AprU 5,
B.C. 1966s, there must have been an interval of twenty-three
years between this allusion to the seed of Abraham, as already
in being, and the first time when it couid have been literally
so aUuded to.
The next is that, ver. 13, it recognises also an interval of
400 years, as something which must be transacted somewhere
or other, and in some manner or other, between the earliest
time when this seed was actually now in being and this return
of theirs to the promised land. And supposing the end of
these 400 years to have coincided with the Exodus, and the
date of the Exodus B.C. 1560, the beginning, 400 years be
fore, must have coincided with B.C. i960. And that would
come so near to the date of the birth of Isaac, B.C. 1966, that
we could scarcely be mistaken in assuming the terminus a quo
of these 400 years to have been always intended of the date of
f ii. 195. s Ibid. ii. 198-202.

46 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, vii.
the birth of Isaac, and the 400 years themselves to have been
merely a round number for 406.
(68.) The next is, that, -with respect to the mode in which
this interval was to be transacted by the seed in question,
whether in 406 years of sojourning, or 406 of suffei-ing, in a
land which was not their own — ^before they came again to
their o-wn land — there is, at first sight, an ambiguity; but
only such as a somewhat more literal version, and a somewhat
different division and pxmctuation, of the original, are compe
tent to remove.
Gen. XV. 13-16 : " Know of a surety, that a stranger shall
thy seed be in a land not their own — four hundred years —
(and they shall serve them ; and they shaU afflict them, and
also that nation which they shall serve do I (shall I) judge) —
and afterwards shall they come out. . . And the fourth genera
tion, they shall return hither: for the iniquity ofthe Amorites
is not yet fuU."
The parenthesis thus introduced shews that the four hun
dred years were intended to refer to the sojourning, aUuded to
just before — (Know of a surety that thy seed shaU be a stranger
in a land which is not their own — ) four hundred years of so
journing by them, wheresoever that should be, in the capa
city of strangers, from the bii-th of Isaac, AprU 5, B.C. 1966,
to the date of the Exodus, April 10, B.C. 1560 — i. e. as the
event proves, partly in the land of Canaan, wliile still aliens
even to that, from the bu-th of Isaac, B.C. 1966, to the Descent
into Egypt, B.C. 1778, 188 years, — partly in the land of
^S7V^> ^s still more aliens and strangers in relation to that,
from the Descent, August or September, B,C. 1778, to the
Exodus, April 10, B.C. 1560, 317 years, seven or eight
months. (69.) The prediction went on to say. That at the end of
that time they should come out of this land of their sojourn
ing as strangers in it. It should be the fourth generation,
and they should come forth from that land, and return to the
land from which they had gone down to that ; the land of
promise, their own land. The important part of this predic
tion is the ¦npo6ia-ij,(a, specified beforehand, for this coming out
of the one and this return to the other, the fourth generation.
Nothing was promised in those words, nothing can fairly be

QUEST. VII.] Exodus in the fourth Generation. 47
considered indispensable to their fulfilment, except the matter
of faet, that from the actual Descent of the cliildren of Abra
ham to Egypt, and the actual beginning of their sojourning
there, and the actual end of that sojourning by the actual
Exodus of the nation of the Israelites, there were actually four
generations, in the sense of four actual steps of descent from
father to son, between any one of the fifty-five who went
down -with Jacob to Egypt, or were found by him in Egypt
already, B,C. 1778, and the Uving contemporaries of the
Exodus, in the same line, B.C. 1560.
(70.) Of generations of this kind, consisting of four steps of
succession between the Descent and the Exodus, Dr. Colenso
himself (109) has produced a variety of instances from Scriji-
ture ; but in estimating the length of each of these, and the
interval taken up by them coUectively, he has fallen into the
mistake of treating each as a chronological unit, in the ordi
nary sense of a generation — simply as a measure of time, three
of which are commonly assumed equivalent to 100 years —
whereas, in the aUusion to the fourth generation, which we
are consideruig, nothing was evidently intended but the life
time of the fourth in the direct line of descent, from any of
those who went down into Egypt with Jacob ; and in verifi
cation of the prediction by the event nothing is to be con
sidered but that. We are not concerned with the actual
lengths of these intervals in any of these cases ; all that we
are concerned with is the fact of the lineal descent in each,
from the father to the son, and the number of these steps of
descent, within the extremes in question, neither more nor
less than four. And as it can make no difference to which of
the tribes in general, or to which of the families in that tribe
in particular, we might propose to apply this test, let us be
permitted to take the tribe of Levi, and one of the famiUes in
that tribe.
(71.) Levi, the third son of Jacob, born, according to my
Chronology, B.C. i8ai, had arrived at man's estate before the
Descent into Egypt — he could not therefore be assumed with
propriety as the representative of the first generation of the
Descent, and of the sojourn, consequent upon it. But Kohath
his son, born, according to the same chronology, B.C. 1783,
was only four or five years old at the Descent — he may there-

48 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, vii.
fore with the utmost propriety be considered the representa
tive of the first generation in question. And that being
assumed, the representative of the second generation must be
some one of the sons of Kohath — whether his eldest son or
not, to the simple continuity of the line of descient from Le-n
being indifferent. Amram, according to Scripture, was the
son of Kohath, and very possibly his eldest son ; though we
have no positive assurance of that fact. Amram then, as the
son of Kohath, and grandson of Levi, whensoever bom in the
lifetime of Kohath, would be competent to represent the
second generation of the sojourn in Egypt. And on the same
principle Aaron, as undoubtedly the son of Amram, and
grandson of Kohath, and great-grandson of Le-vi, whether the
firstborn of Amram or not, and whether born early or late in
his lifetime, would be just as competent to represent the
third. And on the same principle, any of the sons of Aaron,
Nadab, Abihu, or Eleazar, or Ithamar, would be just as com
petent to represent the fourth generation — ^in this particular
line at least, through Levi and Kohath — and therefore the
generation, contemplated beforehand by the Prediction, as the
destined contemporaries of the Exodus. And no one requires
to be told that that was strictly the case — that any one of
these four, Nadab, Abihu, or Eleazar, or Ithamar, lineally
descended from Levi, through Kohath, Amram, and Aaron,
was of the number of those who came out at the Exodus,
arrived at man's estate; two of them at least, Nadab and
Abihu, twenty years old and upwards at the time, the third
and the fourth, Eleazar and Ithamar, little short of the same
age also.
(72.) And as to the probable intervals between each of
these steps of descent — Kohath the son of Levi being five
years old B. C. 1778, and Amram the son of Kohath, accord
ing to my chronology, having been born cir. B. C. 171a, Ko
hath was seventy-one years old at that time. Aaron, being
three years older than Moses, (born, as I have shewn'', B. C.
1640,) must have been bom B. C. 1643, ^^^^^ Amram his
father was seventy years of age. We have no data in Scripture
for the births of Nadab and Abihu; but supposing both of
these set aside, forasmuch as we know that Eleazar, the third
^ Fasti Cath. &c, ii. 210-217. 'i^-

QUEST. VII.] Exodus ill the fourth Geueration. 49
son of Aaron, must have been still under twenty at the rebel
lion of Kadesh Barnea, August or September B. C. 1559 — we
may infer from that fact that he could not have been born
earlier than B. C. 1578 at least, when Aaron his father must
have been sixty-five years old complete *.
We thus see that the absolute length of the generations by
which the actual line of the succession, from the contempo
raries of the Descent to the contemporaries of the Exodus,
was destined by Providenee to be carried on, and actually was
carried on between these extremes, instead of twenty-five or
thirty years, according to the ordinary chronological standard,
was from sixty to seventy years t- And though that may ap-
* Miriam, Aaron, and Moses, it is well known to all the readers of
Scripture, were the children of Amram, by Jochebed, a daughter of Levi,
(Exod. ii. I : vi. 20,) whom her mother, it is said, Numb. xxvi. 59, bare to
him in Egypt. She was born consequently some tirae after the Descent,
B. C, 1778, on the one hand, yet before the death of Levi, on the other;
and Levi, according to my chronology, having been born B.C. 1821, (pro
bably in September or October,) and Exod, vi. 16, having lived to be 137
years old, must have died B. C. 1685 or 1684. Jochebed consequently
must have been born before B. C. 1685 at least.
It does not appear that Amram had any more children than these three,
Miriam, Aaron, and Moses ; and of these three, Moses was certainly the
youngest : Aaron was three years older than Moses, and Miriam, to judge
from the part attributed to her, at the exposure of Moses, Exod. ii. 4, 7,
and in particular from the term applied to her of alameh, (which Gesenius
considers to mean a girl, of a marriageable age at least,) could not have
been less than eight or nine years older than Aaron, eleven or twelve years
older than Moses. And Moses having been born B. C. 1640, Miriam on
this principle must have been born B. C. 1651 or 1652. If so, Amram
and Jochebed could not have been married later than B. C. 1652 or 1653,
though they might have been earlier.
We are at liberty to assume that Levi might not have had Jochebed
before he was 121 years of age — and that would be B. C. 1701 : and Jo
chebed, supposed to have been born B. C. 1701, would be forty-eight or
forty-nine complete B. C. 1652 or 1653, (possibly at her marriage,) forty-
nine or fifty at the birth of Miriam, fifty-eight or fifty-nine at the birth of
Aaron, sixty-one or sixty-two at the birth of Moses. — See Colenso, 102,
103, 104.
t The average length of the generation, while this increase of the nation
in Egypt was going on, in all the tribes, (that of Levi as well as the rest,)
as we shall see by and by, was about sixteen years ; and yet might it have
been purposely so ordered by the Divine Providence, for the more com
plete attestation of the fulfilment of its own prediction. Gen. xv. 16,— that
E

50 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch, [quest, vin.
pear at first sight excessive, it should be remembered that the
standard of human Ufe also, at this period, instead of being
seventy or eighty, was 130 or 140; as is proved by the case
of Levi, Exod. vi. 16 ; and that of Kohath, vi. 18 ; and that of
Amram, vi. ao — and even by that of Aaron, Numb, xxxiii.
^8, 39 — and that of Moses, Deuter. xxxi. 3 : xxxiv. 7.
(73.) What then, we may ask, was predicted in the
words, It shall be the fourth generation, and they shaU eome
hither again, (meaning, not only should leave Egypt in that
generation, but should actually enter the land of promise in
the same,) which was not literaUy fulfilled, if the Israelites
actuaUy came out of Egypt in the lifetime of Eleazar, the
fourth in descent from Levi, and actuaUy entered into Canaan,
and were settled there in their respective inheritances, in the
lifetime of Eleazar also? about neither of which facts can
there be even the shadow of a doubt. The fulfilment of the
prediction would be equally clear, if the fourth generation
were to be restricted simply to the contemporaries of the
Exodus ; and the contemporaries of the Eisodus, forty years
after, were to be considered a distinct generation. Pliinehas
the son of Eleazar would represent this generation in the di
rect line of descent from Le-vi— for though, whether Phinehas
was born at the time of the Exodus may be a doubtful point,
that he was living and an-ived at man's estate, at the time of
the Eisodus, is not a doubtful point '.

Question VIII. — The numlers of the Israelites at the time of
the E.rodus.
(Colenso, ch. xvii. pp. 103-106.)

(74.) Let ns now proceed to the question of the " Numbers
of the Israelites at the Exodus ;" and for that purpose begin
in each of the tribes there should be some one or more individuals — the
fourth in descent in one and the same line, from its proper founder, — con
temporaries of the Exodus, and living witnesses of the truth of the pre
diction, both of the Exodus and of the Eisodus, in the fourth generation,
in the sense above explained, ofthe lifetime of some one of those who stood
fourth in descent from any one, who was living and representing the first
generation, in the same sense, B. C. 1778.
1 See Numb. xxv. 7-13 : Joshua, xxii. 13-^2 : Judges, xx. 28 : Ps. cvi. 30.

QUEST. VIII.] Numler.<< at the Exodus. 51
with bringing together the promises and predictions of the
futm-e increase of the seed of Abraham, which are on record,
before the Descent, in order to see what that was to which the
truth of God stood pledged, as destined to be brought to
pass in Egypt, long before any of the lineal descendants of
Abraham was yet a sojourner there.
(75.) i. Gen. xii. i: "Now the Loed had said unto Abram,
Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from
thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee : ver. 3,
And I will make of thee a great nation."
ii. Gen. xui. 14; "And the Loed said unto Abram, 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 : ver. 15, For all the land whieh thou
seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever. ver. 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." Cf. ver. 17.
iii. Gen. xv.5 : "And he brought him forth abroad, and said.
Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to
number them : and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be."
Cf. Hebrews, xi. 13.
iv. Gen. xvii. i : " And when Abram was ninety years old
and nine, the Loed appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I
am the Almighty God ; walk before me, and be thou perfect.
ver. 3, And I will make my covenant between me and thee,
and will multiply thee exceedingly .... ver. 4, As for me,
behold, my covenant is vsdth thee, and thou shalt be a father
of many nations, ver. 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. ver. 6, And I will make thee
exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings
shaU come out of thee." Cf. vv. 7, 8. 15, 16.
V. Gen. xviii. 17:" And the Loed said. Shall I hide from
Abraham that thing which I do ; ver. 1 8, Seeing that Abra
ham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all
the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him ?"
vi. Gen. xxii. 15 : " And the angel of the Loed called unto
Abraham out of heaven the second time, ver. 16, And said. By
e 3

ii:i Historical Cha meter ofthe Pentateuch. [que,st. viif.
myself have I sworn, saith the Loed, for because thou hast
done this thing . . . ver. 17, That in blessing I wUl bless thee,
and in multiplying I wdl multiply thy seed as the stars of
the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore."
Cf. Hebrews, xi. 13.
vii. Gen. xxv. 33 : " And the Loed said unto her. Two na
tions are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be
separated from thy bowels ; and the one people shall be stronger
than the other people."
viii. Gen. xxvi. i : " And Isaac went unto Abimelech, king
of the PhiUstines, unto Gerar. ver. a. And the Loed ap
peared unto him, and said,... ver. 3, Sojourn in this land,
and I wiU be with thee, and will bless thee. . . ver. 4, And I
will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven."
Cf. V. 34.
ix. Gen. xxviii. 13 : " And, behold, the Loed stood above it,
and said, I am the Loed God of Abraham thy father, and the
God of Isaac : the land whereon thou liest, to thee wiU I give
it, and to thy seed; ver. 14, And thy seed shall be as the
dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west,
and to the east, and to the north, and to the south. . . ver. 15,
And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all pilaces
whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into tliis land ;
for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have
spoken unto thee of." Gen. xxxii. 12 : " And thou saidst, I
will surely do thee good, and make thy seed as the sand
of the sea, which caunot be numbered for multitude." Cf.
xlviii. 4.
X. Gen. xxxv. 11 : " And God" said unto him, I am God
Almighty : be fruitful and multiply ; a nation and a company
of nations shall be of thee."
xi. Gen. xlvi. 3 : " And God spake unto Israel in the visions
of the night, and said, Jacob, Jacob. And he said. Here am I.
ver. 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, ver. 4, I wdl go down with thee into Egypt,
and I wdl also surely bring thee up agaiu."
xii. Gen, xlviu, 3 : " And Jacob said unto Joseph, God
Almighty appeared unto me at Luz in the land of Canaan, and

quest, viii.] Numbers at the Exodus. ' 53
blessed me. ver. 4, And said unto me. Behold, I will make
thee fruitful, and multiply thee, and I will make of thee a
multitude of people." Cf. Exod. xxxn. 13.
Numb. xxui. 19 : " God w not a man, that he should lie;
neither the son of man, that he should repent. Hath he said,
and shall he not do it ? or hath he spoken, and shall he not
make it good ?" Such being the promises and predictions of
the future increase of the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,
stiU on record, let us next proceed to consider the historical
account of their fulfilment, the circumstances under which it
took place, and in spite of what schemes and contrivances of
human poUcy to prevent it.
(76.) i. Gen. xlvii. 37 : " And Israel dwelt in the land of
Egypt, in the country of Goshen \ and they had possessions
therein, and grew, and multiplied exceedingly."
ii. Gen. xlviii. 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, ver. 16,
The Angel whieh redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads ; . . .
and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the
earth." Cf. ver. 19.
iii. Exod. i. 7 : " And the children of Israel were fruitful,
and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceed
ing mighty; and the land was filled \vith them." Cf. Acts
vii. 17.
iv. Exod. i. 8 : " Now there arose up a new king over Egypt,
which knew not Joseph, ver. 9, And he said unto his people.
Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and
mightier than we : ver. 10, Come on, let us deal wisely with
them, lest they midtiply , . . (cf Acts vii. i8-) ver. 11, There
fore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with
then- burdens. And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities,
Pithom and Raamses. ver. 13, But the more they afflicted
them, the more they multiplied and grew. And they were
grieved because of the children of Israel."
V. Exod. i. 15 : " And the king of Egypt spake to the
Hebrew midwives... ver. 16, And he said. When ye do the
office of a midwife to the Hebrew women. . .if it 5e a son, then
ye shall kdl him ; but if it le a daughter, then she shall live.
ver. 17, But the midwives feared God, and did not as the

54 Historical Character of ihe Pentateuch, [quest, vm
king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the men children
alive, ver. i8. And the king of Egypt called for the mid-
wives, and said unto them. Why have ye done this thing, and
have saved the men chddren alive? ver. 19, And the mid-
wives said uuto Pharaoh, Because the Hebrew women are not
as the Egyptian women ; for they are lively, and are delivered
ere the midwives eome in unto them. ver. 30, Therefore God
dealt well with the midwives : and the people multiplied, and
waxed very mighty."
-vi. Exod. i. 33 : " And Pharaoh charged all his people, say
ing. Every son that is born ye shaU cast into the river, and
every daughter ye shall save alive." Cf. Aets vii. 19.
vii. Ps. cv. 33 : " Israel also came into Egypt ; and Jacob
sojourned in the land of Ham. ver. 34, And he increased his
people greatly ; and made them stronger than their enemies.
ver. 35, He turned their heart to hate his people, to deal
subtilly -with his servants."
viii. Exod. v. 5 : " Behold, the people of the land now are
many, and ye make them rest from their burdens."
ix. Deut. i. 9 : " And I spake unto you at that time, saying,
I am not able to bear you myself alone : ver. 10, The Loed
your God hath multipUed you, and, behold, ye are this day as
the stars of heaven for multitude, (ver. 1 1, The Loed God
of your fathers make you a thousand times so many more as
ye are, and bless you, as he hath promised you !)"¦ — Deut. x. 22 :
" Thy fathers went down into Egypt with threescore and ten
persons ; and now the Loed thy God hath made thee as the
stars of heaven for multitude." Cf. xxviii. 63.
x. Numb. xxii. 3 : "And Moab was sore afraid of the people,
because they ivere many. . , ver. 4, And Moab said unto the
elders of Midian, Now shall this company lick up all that are
round about us, as the ox licketh up the grass of the field,
...ver. 5, He sent messengers therefore unto Balaam... saying,
Behold, there is a people come out from Egypt : behold,
they cover the face ofthe earth." Cf. ver. 11. — Numb, xxiii. 10 :
" Who can count the dust of Jacob, and the number of the
fourth part of Israel ? "
(77.) I do not think it necessary to make any remarks at
present on the preceding accounts, except on what relates to
the expedients of the kings of Egypt, whether one or more

QUEST. VIII.] Numbers at the E,mlus. 55
than one, to check the increase of the people. The first
appears to have been the order to the midwives, to kill the
men children at the time of their birth. It has been already
explained (55) that, at this period of the history of the world,
the marriages of a given year being celebrated everywhere,
and especiaUy in Egypt, all at once, the births of the year
were naturally to be expected, more or less, at once also. It
is evident therefore that this expedient of the kings of Egypt,
had it been carried into effect, would have been well adapted
to answer its purpose, by cutting off the whole of the male
births of the year at one stroke. But as the execution of
the order was intrusted to those who were expected to be
assisting at the delivery of the Hebrew women, and as the
terms of the order themselves seemed to include none but
those at whose birth the Hebrew midwives should be present,
it was a priori liable to be defeated, not only by the conscien
tious repugnance of the midwives, who feared God more than
Pharaoh, to be instrumental in executing such an order, but
also, and probably chiefly, by the interposition of God himself,
to enable the Hebrew women, by the quickness of their de
livery, to anticipate and dispense with the services of the
midwives. And to this end and effect the custom, relating to
the rule of marriage in these primitive times, just alluded to,
would be very serviceable also. For when we consider the
number of marriages, which at this period of the sojourn in
Egypt would probably be celebrated every year, among the
Israelites themselves, and the corresponding number whicii
might be expected to be born from them, it will be self-evident
that the services of two midwives only never could have been
competent to answer so many demands upon them at once ;
and that by far the greater part of the mothers of a given
year must be left to be delivered of themselves, as well as
they might. It makes very little difference in this respect, if
we suppose the two mentioned by name, Shiphrah and Puah,
to have been simply the heads ofa caste, with many subordi
nates under them. The excuse which they made to Pharaoh,
in their own behalf — independent of the higher and better
motive to their conduct, assigned by Scripture itself— that the
Hebrew women were quick and lively, and delivered l)efore

56 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, viii.
they could come in to them, might still be true, and appear
so even to the king himself.
(78.) With respect to the duration of this order, having
thus been found to fail of its object the very first year, it is
probable it was not reiseated another year ; and as to the time
when it was issued, I should be of opinion it was one of the
three years between the birth of Aaron, B.C. 1643, and the
birth of Moses, B.C. 1640. And probably the middle one,
B. C. 1642 itself. For, it appears next, that the king of
Egypt, having found the instrumentality of the mid-wives
likely to be of no avail in carrying into effect the suggestions
of his cruel policy, changed the order addressed to them, into
another addressed to his own people, Exod. i. 23, " And Pha
raoh charged all his people, saying. Every son that is born ye
shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save
alive." And this order had certainly been issued before the
birth of Moses, but not before the birth of Aaron, three years
older than Moses.
(79.) Now that this contrivance too of the Egyptian king
for keeping down the increase of the people, in some manner
or other must have been frustrated, and have failed of its
effect, is necessarily to be inferred from the testimonies quoted
supra (76. iv. v.), which distinctly assert that the more the
Egyptians oppressed them, and tried to repress them, the
more they multiplied and grew. And it would not be diffi
cult, if we might do it without presumption, to conjecture
the mode in which the Providence of God could easdy have
brought that to pass. The order of the exposure of the bii-ths
of the year being limited to the males, it was easy to render
it ineffectual by causing none to be born among the people of
God, while this order was still in force, except females. And
that this, even to our own apprehensions, must appear to
have been very possible, \\ill be evident if we reflect that the
distinction of sexes is made in the womb— at some deter
minate period of the interval between conception aud
birth, before which the embryo is capable of either sex —
and that the actual distinctions of this kind at last can
be made only liy God himself. Every man child, born iuto
the world, might have been born a woman child ; and every

QUEST. VIII.] Numbers at the Exodus. 57
man child, even at his birth, and ever after, bears about him
an external token of what he was once capable of becoming,
in the germs or rudiments of mamma or paps.
It was easy then for the Divine .Providence to defeat the
end and design of this order, by causing none but females to
be born, while it was still in force. Aud though it may be
objected, (and especiaUy if the order continued any length of
time in force,) that the effect of this oeconomy would be to
make the number of female births among the Israelites
greatly exceed that of male, it was easy for Omniscience, to
which all these contingencies must have been known long
before, to obviate that too, by causing the number of male
births for any number of years before, which the circum
stances of the ease might require, to exceed that of female,
so as to make the proportion of one to the other, upon the
whole, agreeable to the order and course of nature.
(80.) Let us then proceed to consider the actual increase
of the people in Egypt at last, or the actual amount of the
numbers which went out at the Exodus ; and for that pur
pose begin with producing the testimonies from which it is
to be collected.
i. Exod. xii. 37 : "And the children of Israel journeyed from
Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot, that
were men, beside children."
ii. Numb. xi. 31: "And Moses said. The people, among
whom I am, are six hundred thousand footmen."
The first of these statements belongs to the year and the
day of the Exodus, April 10, B.C. 1560; the second to the
second year of the Exodus, B. C. 1559, and the time in that
year at which the second miracle of quails was wrought.
They are both to the same effect; and each leads to the same
inference, that the sum total of all who came out at the
Exodus, males and adults, in contradistinction to women and
children, in round numbers did not exceed 600,000.
iii. Exod. xxx. 11-16 — (a passage already quoted and com
mented upon, 46 sqq.) — every one who should go to be num
bered, (every male as the context implies,) from twenty years
old and upwards, being charged by this injunction with the
payment of the half shekel, it appears from Exod. xxxviii. 36
— that the number who actually paid this tax (males from

58 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, vm.
twenty years old and upwards) were 603,550. And from
these two facts laid together the inference appears to be in
evitable, that unless there were males, above the age of
twenty, who nevertheless paid no redemption-money for their
souls, and from whom none was required, the sum total of
the male population, of every age above the age of twenty,
when this tax was levied, i. e. before the end of the first year
ofthe Exodus (51), could not possibly exceed 603,550-
(81.) It appears further, from Numb. i. 46, ii. 32 (ef. xiv.
29), that the number of those, who passed at the muster, two
or three months only, as we have seen (52 sqq.), later, was
exactly the same as that of those who paid the redemption-
money on this occasion, 603,550; all of them males, above
the age of twenty, in this instance too. So far, the inference
from this fact would seem to be the same as that from the
other; viz. that the sum total of males, above the age of
twenty, who came Out at the Exodus, must have been this of
603,550!^. But an addition to their description occurs in this
second instance, Numb. i. 3, which did not occur in the
former — " Able to go forth to war" — 603,550, on this latter
occasion, above the age of twenty, yet still of the -military
age, whatsoever that was. And commentators have generaUy
taken it for granted that those above the age of twenty, in a
given body or aggregate of individuals, and those of an age for
war, could not have been the same in point of number. And
under ordinary circumstances, that might reasonably be sup
posed to be the case; but in this particular instance there
might be special reasons, to render it highly probable, if not
morally certain, that males and above the age of twenty, and
males and of the military age, would be convertible terms.
(83.) i. The standard of human longevity, still holding
good at the Exodus, 120 years at least — so much greater
than what it became soon after, and what it is at present ;
and the proportionably longer duration of the military age,
adapted to that standard itself.
ii. The special Providence of God, from which it might be
expected a priori that among those armies, which God himself
was leading out of Egypt, to wage his own wars, (Numb. xxi.
k Cf. also, Numb. i. 2, 3 18. 20. 22-n. 26. 28. 30. 32. H' 36- 38. 40 42.
4.5. 46.

QUEST. VIII.J Numbers at the E.codus. 59
14,) and to fight his own battles, in Canaan, not one indivi
dual soldier would be found disqualified by age or infirmity
from taking his proper part in this common duty and
service of all.
in. The positive testimony of Ps, cv. 37, that, when the
Israelites left Egypt at the Exodus, there was not one feeble
person among their tribes — not one (for such is the meaning
of the Hebrew term, rendered by feeble,) liable a priori to
totter, to stagger, to be tired out and wearied, whether with
the exertion required from travelling, or the efforts required
from soldiers, through old age, bodily infirmity, or the like ;
and the indirect testimony of Joshua, v. 4. 6 — that all who
came out of Egypt, circumcised, above the age of twenty,
and all who died in the wilderness, circumcised, above the
age of twenty, (which under the circumstances of the case
must have been the male and adult part of the entire nation
at the Exodus,) were men of war; i. e. were able to go out
to war.
iv. Examples of the fact itself, for which we are contend
ing, either that the actual military age of this aera was much
longer than it is at present, or that it was rendered so, xar'
olKovoix.lav, to these soldiers of the Loed of Hosts. As i. the
case of Caleb, forty years old, according to his own account,
(Joshua xiv. 7. 10,) in the second year of the Exodus, and
eighty-five in the seventh year of the Eisodus, when the division
of the lands was going on, yet as strong and as fit for war at
the latter time as at the former, ii. The case of Joshua, who
was fifty-six years of age, according to my chronology, at the
Exodus, and consequently ninety-six at the Eisodus, yet evi
dently as fit for the five or six years of incessant warfare in the
land of Canaan, which then awaited him, as on the day he left
Egypt, iii. The case even of Moses himself, 130 years old
complete at his death', yet still in possession of all his physi
cal powers ; his eye not yet dimmed, his natural force not yet
abated. And though it may be said, this was a special dis
pensation in his case, suspending the progress of natural decay
until the special service, for which all his natural bodily and
mental powers would be required, was completed, a reason
1 Fasti Cath. ii. 210, 111 . Deuteron. xx.xiv. 7.

60 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, vin.
like that, whieh required sueh a special dispensation in his
ease, on the same principle, would have required it in that of
the humblest of his followers; each of whom had his own
individual part to perform in this common work of all, and
each had the same need of all his physical powers and capa
bilities for that purpose.
(83.) These considerations, and the express testimony of
those other texts, which make no difference between the
number of males above the age of twenty, and the number of
males able to go out to war, are competent in my opinion to jus
tify the inference that the limitation, at Numb. i. 3,3, of adults,
and able to go forth to war, implies no inconsistency -with the
other statement of males above the age of twenty, without
any further qualification ; but merely makes us aware of a fact,
whieh we might have surmised, but could not have kno-wn for
certain, without it, that among aU these males, adults or
above the age of twenty, there was not one as yet unable to
go out to war.
(84.) Lastly, it appears from the second census. Numb,
xxvi, 1-4; 5^ j Deut. ii. 14, 15, that as the number of adults,
still able for war, on this first occasion was 603,550, so the
number, on the second occasion, simUar ly described, was
601,730 : and among these last, there was not one who had
passed in review at the former numbering, except Caleb and
Joshua, xxvi. 63-65. These numbers, on the second occa
sion, do so far vouch for those on the first ; for it appears from
Joshua V. 4, 6; Numb. xiv. 39; xx-^d. 63-65; Deut. ii. 14,
15, that each of these effects of the thirty-eight years' inter
val between the two, both the removal of aU above the age of
twenty and fit for war, who had passed the former census, and
the raising up in their stead of all, who were of, or above, the
age of twenty, and fit for war, and passed this second num
bering, was alike Kar oiKovoixlav — and the increase in the one
case was purposely accommodated to the decrease in the other.
And this inference of the proportional decrease and increase of
the rest of the males in these instances, in general, is much
.confirmed by that of the tribe of Levi in the same interval of
time, in particular : the numbers of that tribe, males, on the
former occasion having been 33,000 (Numb. ui. 3-39), and on
this second occasion, (Numb. xxvi. 57-63,) being 23,000.

QUEST. IX.J Flrstbovu, and Male Adults. 61
(85.) It may be assumed therefore, as the general conclu
sion fi-om aU these premises, that the number of males, from
twenty years old and upwards, in all the tribes, except that of
Le-vi, taken together, which came out of Egypt at the Exodus,
must have been 603,550. And the number of females, of the
same age, who came out at the same time also, being assumed
as equal, to that of the males, the sum total of both together,
and so far of the entire nation, at the Exodus, excepting the
tribe of Levi, must have been 1,307,100. And this too being
conceded, to know the gross amount of both sexes, and of
every age, which came out on the same occasion, nothing is
necessary but the numbers, of both sexes, and of every age,
under twenty, (which Seripture expresses by from one month
old and upwards,) which eame out also. And this brings us
to the question of the number of the firstborn, and of the
proportion of the number of the firstborn to the rest of the
population, at the Exodus — a question, which in the prosecu
tion of our own argument naturally comes in here, but in Dr.
Colenso's book is the subject of his Fourteenth Chapter — as
sometlung distinct in itself.

Question IX. — The Number of the Firstborn, compared with the
number of Male Adults.
(Colenso, ch. xiv. pp. 84-90.)

(86.) Now the number of the firstborn, taken as com
manded. Numb. iii. 40-43, in the second year of the Exodus,
was found to be 33,373 ; and this number, as I have observed
(84), is checked and confirmed by that of the Levites, — taken
on the same occasion, (Numb. iii. 39, 14-39,) ^^^ taken in
stead ofthe firstborn, — 33,000.
The number of the firstborn males, then, from one month
old and upwards, in the second year of the Exodus, having
thus been 33,373, and the number of males, from twenty years
old and upwards, at the same time, having been 603,550, it has
been inferred from these two facts that the proportion of
those firstborn in particular to these males in general must

62 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch, [quest, ix,
have been that of one firstborn to every forty-four or forty-
five males. And Dr. Colenso is one of those who has
drawn this inference, and has gone even further still, and
inferred as a logical consequence of such premises (93),
that evei-y firstborn, under such circumstances, must have
made one of a family of eighty-eight individuals, male and
female, collectively. And this is one of the many startling
conclusions from data supposed to be fumished by Scripture,
the very extravagance of which is the best argument, -with
every unprejudiced mind, that there must be some great mis
take in the assumption on which they are founded.
(87.) Now the origin of this mistake, it appears to me, is to
be traced first of all to the misapprehension of the injunction,
relating to the numbering of these firstborn. Numb. ui. 40 :
" And the Loed said unto Moses, Number all the firstborn of
the males ofthe children of Israel, from a month old and upward,
and take the number of their names." The age thus specified
was limited at one extreme, but not at the other — from a month
old, as the earliest age, but upwards simply, for the latest —
and upwards, so expressed, might be so construed at first sight,
as to include every age in the ascending scale, from a month, to
any assignable age more than that. And as so expressed, it
would seem to have been intended to include not only the
firstborn among all who were under twenty years of age at
the time, but also among all who were above it. And that
being assumed as a possible, and even prima facie a natural,
construction of its meaning, it would be difflcult to say, that
even the inference just alluded to, extravagant and absurd as
it must appear, might not be logically deducible from it.
(88.) Independent however of the absurdity of such an
inference in itself, that it must be founded on some great mis
take of the injunction in question, would be proved by the
foUowing consideration alone : That, on this principle, there
could not have been one of those firstborn who, as the eldest of
a family of forty-four or forty-five sons, must not have been
forty-four or forty-five years of age at least, and therefore
must not have been obnoxious to, and no doubt must not
have paid, the redemption-money, levied on all above twenty
years of age, two or three months before this time. Wliat
other redemption then could these in particular have stood in

quest. IX.J Firstlorn, and Male Adults. 63
need of^ — ^to make it necessary to take the Levites instead of
them, as well as of the rest ? It must be evident consequently,
that to construe the injunction Numb. iii. 40 as taking in any
above the age of twenty, yet supposed to stand to the rest of
the adult population in the relation of firstborn, as leading
directly to such an inconsistency as this, of the redemption
ofthe same individual soul twice over, first by the redemption-
money, and again, by taking the soul ofthe Levite in his stead,
must be the consequence of some misconstruction of its meaning.
How then is it to be understood, so as neither to mistake its
true meaning, and yet to avoid such an inconsistency as that ?
(89.) To go to the bottom of this question, we must begin
with referring to the account which Scripture itself has given
of the devotion of the firstborn to God, which rendered it ne
cessary that their souls should be redeemed, either by taking
the Levites in their stead, or in some other way.
i. Exod. xiii. i : "And the Loed spake unto Moses, saying,
ver. 3, Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the
womb among the children of Israel, loth of man and of beast :
it is mine... ver. ii, And it shall be, when the Loed shall
bring thee into the land of the Canaanites, as he sware unto
thee and to thy fathers, and shall give it thee, ver. 1 3, That
thou shalt set apart unto the Loed all that openeth the matrix,
and every firstling that cometh of a beast which thou hast ;
the males shall be the Loed's. ver. 1 3, And every firstling of an
ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb ; and if thou wdt not re
deem it, then thou shalt break his neck : and all the firstborn
of man among thy children shalt thou redeem, ver. 14, And it
shall be when thy son asketh thee in time to come, saying.
What is this ? that thou shalt say unto him. By strength
of hand the Loed brought us out from Egypt, from the house
of bondage : ver. 15, And it came to pass, when Pharaoh would
hardly let us go, that the Loed slew all the firstborn in the
land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of
beast : therefore I sacrifice to the Loed all that openeth the
matrix, being males ; but all the firstborn of my children I
redeem." ii. Exod. xxii. 39 : " The firstborn of thy sons shalt thou
give unto me."
iu. Exod. xxxiv. 19 : " All that openeth the matrix is mine ;

64 H.-ilorieal Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, ix.
and every firstling among thy cattle, whether ox or sheep, that
is male. ver. 20, But the firstling of an ass thou shalt redeem
with a lamb:... All the firstborn of thy sons thou shalt re
deem." iv. Numb. iii. 11 : "And the Loed spake unto Moses, say
ing, ver. 1 3, And I, behold, I have taken the Levites from among
the children of Israel, instead of all the firstborn that openeth
the matrix among the children of Israel : therefore the Le
vites shall be mine ; ver. 13, Because all the firstborn are mine ;
for on the day that I smote all the firstborn in the land of
Egypt I hallowed unto me all the firstborn in Israel, both
man and beast ; mine shall thej' be : I am the Loed." Cf.
41.45- V. Numb. viii. 14 : " Thus shalt thou separate the Levites
from among the children of Israel : and the Le-vites shall be
mine. . .ver. 16, For they are wholly given unto me from among
the children of Israel ; instead of such as open every womb,
even instead of the firstborn of all the children of Israel, have
I taken them unto me. ver. 17, For all the firstborn ofthe chil
dren of Israel are mine, both man and beast ; on the day that
I smote every firstborn in the land of Egypt I sanctified them
for myself. ver. 18, And I have taken the Le^dtes for all
the firstborn of the children of Israel."
(90.) These texts plainly declare that the firstborn of the
Israelites became consecrated to the Loed, at the time, and in
consequence, of the judgment inflicted on the Egyptians iu
the plague of the firstborn ; and that had not provision been
made even then in the purpose of God for the redemption
of the firstborn of his own people, the lives even of those,
at the time, and ever after, must have been treated as
forfeit to the plague in question, as much as those of the
firstborn of the Egyptians. It is manifest therefore, that,
with reference to any such distinction among these firstborn
themselves, as that of children or of men, of non-adults or of
adults, there could have been no difference, at the time of this
plague, between the firstborn of the Egyptians and the first
born of the Israelites. Both must have belonged to the same
class, as children, or both to the same, as men ; both must
have been reducible to the same category of adults, or of non-
adults, alike. Let us then proceed to consider what further

QUEST. IX.J Firstborn, and Male Adults. 65
light may have been thrown by Scripture on this question, of
the particular subjects of the last of the plagues among the
Egyptians, whether children as such, or men.
i. Exod. iv. 33 : " And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh,
Thus saith the Loed, Israel is my son, even my firstborn: ver.
33, 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."
ii. Exod. xi. 4 : " And Moses said. Thus saith the Loed,
About nudnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt : ver.
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 maidservant that is behind the mdl ;
and all the firstborn of beasts."
iii. Exod. xii. 13 : " 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
Egjrpt I will execute judgment : I am the Loed. ver. 39, And it
came to pass, that at midnight the Loed smote all the first
born in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that
sat on his throne, unto the firstborn of the captive that was in
the dungeon ; and all the firstborn of cattle, ver. 30, And Pha
raoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the
Egjrptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there
was not a house where there was not one dead."
iv. Ps. Ixxviu. 50 : " He made a way to his anger ; he
spared not their soul from death, but gave their life over to
the pestilence; ver. 51, And smote aU the firstborn in Egypt;
the chief of their strength in the tabernacles of Ham." Ps. cv.
^6 : " He smote also all the firstborn in their land, the chief
of all their strength."
(91.) These are plain descriptions, not of heads of house
holds and fathers of families themselves, as the proper subjects
of this visitation, among the Egyptians, but of a certain class
of the component parts of every such household or every such
family among them, at the time ; the children as such, in
contradistinction to the parents; — and among the children,
the firstborn as such in contradistinction to the rest. And
such having been the proper subjects of this visitation among
the Egyptians, such must have been the proper subjects of

66 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch, [quest, ix.
it among the Israelites also, if no eeconomy of redemption had
been provided for them, no more than for the same class among
the Egyptians. It is evident therefore, beyond the necessity
of any further argument to prove so clear a point, that by
the firstborn of the people of Israel, as obnoxious a priori
to the same judgment as the firstborn of the Egyptians, no
description of persons could have been intended at the time,
and none can be considered intended in subsequent aUusions
to them, but the firstborn, males, in every family ; the eldest
male children among the children of the people of Israel, pro
perly so called. And the question is now reducible simply to
this issue. What must be understood by the children of Israel,
and consequently by the firstborn of those children, properly
so called ?
(92.) This phrase of the chddren of Israel in the original is
always expressed in the form of Beni-Israel ; and Beni-Israel,
we may freely admit, both may be, and often is, used in the
utmost comprehension of such a phrase, for all the lineal de
scendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob ; for the whole nation
of the Israelites, so descended, and at once. But this more
extended application of the phrase to the entire series of de
scendants from one stock, however far downwards, it is evi
dent, is itself a secondary one, founded on the proper sense
and proper application of such a phrase, whereby, in this
instance, it must at one time have been restricted to the
Twelve Patriarchs of the Tribes, as for a time the only Ute
raUy existing Beni-Israel, or Chddren of Israel. And the
firstborn of the children of Israel being understood of the
firstborn among the children in this restricted sense, the next
question is. Whether the Beni-Israel in this most proper
sense, in the idiom of Scripture, has not its recognised
limits, whereby virtute termini itself, as so used in a parti
cular instance, it must take in only those of a certain age ?
(93.) Now both the idiom of Scripture, in the use of this
phrase, and the meaning of the phrase itself as so used, it
appears to me, may most distinctly be collected from the ac
count of the rebellion of Kadesh-Barnea, and its consequences.
Numb. xiv. 1-3 : The congregation, having heard the report
of the spies just returned, are represented as saying, " Would
God that we had died in the land of Egypt ! or would God

QUEST. IX.J Firstborn, and Male Adults. 67
we had died in this wilderness ! and wherefore hath the
Lord brought us unto this land, to fall by the sword, that our
wives and our children should be a prey?" And it is in
reference to this expressed apprehension about the fate of
their children in particular, that the Deity, soon after, is re
presented to say, ver. 39, " Your carcases shall fall in this
wUderness ; and all that were numbered of you, according to
your whole number, from twenty years old and upward,
which have murmured against me... ver. 31, But your little'
ones, which ye said should be a prey, them will I bring in,
and they shall know the land which ye have despised.
ver. 33, But as for you, your carcases, they shall fall in this
wilderness, ver. 33, And your children shall wander in the
wilderness forty years,.., until your carcases be wasted in the
wilderness." Compare also Deut. i. 39, which is even more
direct to this point : " Moreover your little ones, which ye
said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day
had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in
thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess
it." Now we know that aU, who were thus excluded from
the promised land, at that time were above the age of
twenty ; (cf. Numb. xxii. 1 1 ;) and all, who were still to be
admitted to it, at this time, were under the age of twenty —
and these latter being also so clearly described as children,
as merely little ones, at this same time, in contradistinction
to those who were men — this testimony, in my opinion, is
demonstrative that the phrase of Beni-Israel, in its proper
idiomatic and restricted sense, as so used in Scripture, is
always intended, and always to be understood as intended, of
that part of the nation in general, which was standing, at a
given time, to the rest of the nation, in the relation of children
indeed, but of children still under the age of twenty.
(94.) With this understanding then of the proper meaning
of the phrase, let us again refer to the terms of the command.
Numb. ui. 40 : "And the Loed said unto Moses, Number all
the firstborn of the males of the children of Israel, from a
month old and upward, and take the number of their
names." It must now appear that though the order was
seemingly limited only at one extreme, and left indefinite
as to the other, it was in reality limited as to both — by its
F 3

68 Historical Cha/racter of the Pentateuch, [quest, ix.
own terms as to the one, by the idiom of Seripture, the usus
loquendi, and the reason of things, as to the other. The sub
jects of this numbering were to be the firstborn of the chddren
of the Israelites as sueh : the oldest age of which, it was well
known, could not exceed twenty — ^the last age to which the
designation of chddren, in contradistinction to men, could be
applicable. It was not necessary then to specify the age at
which the numbering should end, only that at which it should
legin. From one month old and upward — would be perfectly
well understood at the time to mean from one month old to
twenty years.
(95.) To revert then to the question, from which we di
gressed (85), to enter on this; the numbers which came out
at the Exodus. The entire number of adidts of both sexes,
(i. e. above the age of twenty,) as we have seen (85), having
been 1,307,100, we have only to add to this the number of
non-adults, of both sexes, i. e. under the age of twenty, or
between one month old and twenty years, and we shaU get
the sum total of aU who came out at the Exodus, male or
female, adults or non-adults, exclusive of the tribe of Levi
only. And as to the number of these non- adults, we shaU
probably see reason hereafter to conclude that every famdy
among the Twelve Tribes, both before and at the Exodus,
was consisting on an average of six members, the two parents,
and four children, two of them males, and two of them
females. On this principle, the number of the firstborn
males, between the age of one month old and twenty years,
in the second year of the Exodus, having been 33,273, ^^^
number of non-adult males, under the age of twenty, at the
same time, may be assumed at 23,373 ^^^o-
(96.) We have therefore at the Exodus the number of adults
male, above the age of twenty. . . . . . , . 603,550
The number of non-adults male, under the age of twenty . . 44,546
Number of adults and non-adults male . . , , , , 648,096 2

Number of adults and non-adults male and female, exclusive
of those of the Tribe of Levi ,, .. .. .. 1,296,192
Add for the Tribe of Levi, 22,000 x 2 . . . . . . 44,000
Sum total of all the population which came out at the
Exodus  1,340,192

QUEST. X.] Increase of the Tribes iu Egyjit. 69
A very great number indeed to have been raised in 317 or
218 years from fifty-five founders only, but still much less
than has been commonly supposed — 3,000,000, or 3,500,000, or
even 3,000,000 (Col. 39), and much more in unison with what
might be supposed impUed of their actual numbers at the
time, by Deut. -vii. 7, than any of those other calculations
would be. Let us now then proceed to consider in what
manner even this might have been effected — (as according to
Scripture it must have been — ) in the interval between the
date of the Descent, B.C. 1778, and the date of the Exodus,
B.C. 1560.

Question X. — Increase of the Tribes in Egypt, and ihe mode in
tvhich it ivas probably effected.
(Colenso, ch. xvii. pp. 103-106.)

(97.) It is the doctrine of Holy Scripture, that whatsoever
comes to pass in this world, whether of the class of moral, or
of that of physical, events, whether according to a stated order
which we call the course of nature, or after a manner, which
in contradistinction to the natural, we call miraculous, God,
in some sense or other, is the author of it ; God is the real
efflcient cause of it, either as doing it himself, without the
intervention of any instrumental means, or by empowering or
permitting some other agent to do it, which without his co
operation, or his sufferance, could do nothing.
(98.) Still more undeniable, according to Scripture, is it,
that if there is any one regular part of that complicated eeco
nomy which we call the course of nature, from which it is
impossible to exclude the constant presence, the constant
interposition and direction of the Divine Providence, it is the
beginning, the progress, and the consummation of that mys
terious and inscrutable process by which every human soul,
since the creation of the first man, has been successively
brought inlo the world, in its proper human body, to act its
proper part in the great drama of human life and human
probation.

70 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, x.
(99.) We should have been justified in inferring from
Gen. iii. 16, that if the oeconomy of Paradise had continued
undisturbed untd it had answered the purposes, contemplated
by its wise and beneficent author in its first institution, many
fewer would have been born into the world, than have been
bom since the Fall. But the author of this distinction
under all circumstances, must have been God. It must have
been He who would have multipUed the conception of the
woman, in a certain proportion, if there had been no FaU, just
as much as it is He who has actuaUy multipUed it in a much
greater proportion in consequence of the Fall.
(100.) On this point indeed it is almost superfluous to
appeal to the testimony of Scripture. It was God, according
to the Bible, who formed the first man and the first woman
out of the ground, and adapted the sex of the one to that of
the other. It was God who instituted the marriage union,
and declared the final end of the institution from the first, by
accompanying it with the command " to be firuitful, and mul
tiply, and replenish the earth." It is He, who by gi-ving or
withholding His blessing upon it, has rendered it effectual or
ineffectual to sueh an end, ever since. It is He, who has
granted or denied conception, who has opened or shut the"
womb, ever since. It is He, who has distinguished the sex
of the future birth, according to a law of his own, before it
was yet born. It is He, who, for every material tabernacle,
thus gradually formed and moulded by His own plastic
hand within the womb, stdl more independently of aU human
cooperation and instrumentality, of His own wiU and His own
power, at the proper time, has created the immaterial and
spiritual inhabitant ; and at the proper moment has infused
the immortal soul into the ready-prepared mortal body. It is
He, in short, who by this to us inscrutable and incomprehen
sible process, from the day of the creation of the first man to
the present, in subserviency to the ends of his o-wn moral
government in general, has been forming both indi-vidual moral
and responsible agents, and communities of such individuals,
perpetually. (101.) With respect then to any such process as this in
a particular instance, to expect us to trace it out, as far as
it was capable of being investigated by ourselves, on the

quest. X.] Increase ofthe Tribes in Egypt. 71
principle of keeping out of sight the Providential and super
natural element of the causation, would be to expect us to
account for the effect on the principle of excluding from our
consideration the only true cause of the effect. It makes no
difference to the reality of this Pro-ddential element in such
an effect as that of the formation of nations, that, as going
forward at a particular time and in a particular instance at
present, it is carried on, or seems to be carried on, in something
like a fixed and prescribed manner, according to certain in
variable laws, discovered by long experience and observation.
Certain ordinary i-ules and principles do appear to regulate
the increase of mankind and the growth of nations at present,
because none else are reqiured for any such purpose at present.
But were the case to arise, that the ordinary methods of
proceeding, in such a business as this of the formation of a
nation in a given time and under given circumstances, would
be no longer competent to answer their purpose ; no one,
who agreed -with Scripture in resolving every effect of this
kind into its only true efficient cause, would hesitate to expect
that extraordinary means would be resorted to, to bring about
the desired result.
(102.) And this brings us at once to the question, which
we are proposing to discuss, that of the increase of the Tribes in
Egypt, and the circumstances under which it took place. The
prima facie disproportion between the beginning and the end
of the process, in this particular instance, is no new stumbling-
block. On the contrary, it is one of the oldest, because one of
the most obvious and most specious, of its proper class. It is
that one of the objections to the prima facie truth of the
Scripture account which the sceptic, in all ages, has most
instinctively fixed upon, as the best adapted of all to his
particular purpose.
And what, we may ask, is the reason why the defenders of
the historical truth of Scripture are so often reduced to the
necessity of arguing this particular question, as if it had
never been discussed before ? Simply because the objector
persists in treating it as an ordinary one of its kind, requiring
no aUowance for the exceptional character of the case. Simply
because he insists that the defenders of the truth of Scripture,
sincere believers themselves in the only true theory and ex-

72 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest. X.
planation of the increase or the decrease of nations, should
agree with himself in excluding from their account of the
process the only true efficient agency in its direction and
progress throughout.
It is impossible that the defenders of Scripture should ever
consent to argue their cause on such terms as these. On the
contrary, knowing to what the word of God was already
pledged by his repeated promises to Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob, to do for the increase of their seed during its sojourn in
Egypt, to come to this question with an understanding before
hand that the Providential element of the causation was to be
left out of sight, we should consider the same as to begin with
assuming that the only thing, which Scripture declares to be
really impossible with God — -viz. that God should lie, that God
should break his own promise, and falsify his own word, — was
of all things that which was most possible with him; and
knowing, as we must do, from his own assurances, what it was
which he was bomid by his own veracity to do, and the time
within which it was to be done, — and the very inadequate
means, humanly speaking, in proportion to the time, -svith
which it had to be done — to insist on the application of the
ordinary rules and principles of proceeding in such eases, to
a special case like this, we should justly consider to be the
height of prejudice and unreason.
(103.) And yet we may equally justly contend that, while
the only efficient cause of the result in this instance, and
the only true explanation of the disproportion between the
beginning and the end of the process, was the secret Pro
vidence of God ; even that Pro-vidence wrought no miracle to
bring its own purposes to pass. It did not raise up children
to Abraham, in Egypt, out of the stones ; and working as it
might do all along, in its own way, and with an eye to
its own ends, to all outward appearance it was working, in
this instance also, in the ordinary way, and using the ordinary
means whieh it has always used for the growth and formation
of nations ;— and those means simply these three. The union
of the sexes in marriage at a certain time : The proportion of
births, male and female, after a certain ratio : and. The
increase of individuals composing the famdies so formed per
petually, in a certain ratio also. These three laws I say,

QUEST. X.] Iticrease of the Tribes in Egypt. 73
i. Marriages, in a certain degree earlier than usual, yet still
consistent with physical possibility, and the constitution of
human nature — ^ii. Births of males and females in the ordinary
proportion to each other of equaUty — iii. The average number
of the individuals, composing the famdies so raised perpetually,
two of the parents and four of the chddren — these three con
ditions, and three assumptions, with one more, that of the
co-agency and co-operation of the Di-vine Providence -with each
throughout, are aU which are really necessary to account for
the effect at last.
(104.) i. With respect to the first of these, the regular time
of the marriage union, while this process was still going on,
and the consequent length of the generation — ^the ¦ age of
puberty as such, twelve or thirteen in males, eleven or twelve
in females, for any thing known to the contrary, may be
assumed to have always been the same from the creation
downwards ; or, whatever doubt there might seem to be on
this point at first, that it might be so assumed at this period,
appears from the actual examples ofthe fact, produced supra (7.)
On this principle, marriages might be assumed at thirteen
years of age in males, and twelve in females, and generations
accordingly, at thirteen years asunder. And did we assume
them so in the present instance, we might justify the assump
tion by a remarkable instance of the fact, in the genealogy
of Joshua, which happens to be on record in Scripture, and
from which it can be made out, (and in my chronology of the
Old Testament I hope it is made out,) that from the birth of
Ephraim, B. C. 1785, to the birth of Joshua, B. C. 1616 — there
must have been 169 years, divisible among thirteen steps of
descent, in the direct line, thirteen years each asunder. But
we have no occasion, in the present instance, to avail ourselves
of the analogy of this precedent. It is sufficient for our pur
pose to assume the stated age of the marriage union, during
the sojourn in Eg3rpt at sixteen years, or at the least fifteen,
complete, and the length of the generation accordingly.
(105.) ii. With respect to the proportion of male and female
births to each other, during the continuance of the same pro
cess — at present, and in this quarter of the globe, to judge
from the ordinary returns and tables of that time, it is as
nearly as possible that of equality, with a slight percentage of

74 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, x.
excess in the number of males above that of females, in a given
time. We may presume then that there can be no material
error in supposing the same law to have regulated the propor
tion of male and female births at this period also, and in
Egypt, even under ordinary circumstances ; much more under
such extraordinary circumstances as we are now supposing.
It is an assumption at least which every commentator on
Scripture seems to have considered himself justified in making.
There is none at least, who, having seen reason to estimate the
number of males who left Egypt, at such and such an amount,
does not think that, by doubUng that amount, he shall get the
whole number, both males and females, who must have gone
out, on the same occasion, in conjunction.
(106.) iii. With regard to the number of the individuals,
who must have composed the respective famUies of which the
Tribes themselves were made up ; we might, if we pleased,
avail ourselves of the possible birth of twins, in repeated in
stances ; especially if we took into account the natural pecuU
arities of the country, selected by the Di-vine Providence, as
the fittest for this eeconomy of the multiplication of an hand
ful of souls, in a prescribed interval of time, into a numerous
nation — so favourable, according to the testimony of antiqiuty,
for the increase of the human species, that the bu-th of twins
was almost the ordinary law of its kind, and even the birth of
seven at a time, according to Aristotle and Trogus, had been
known to occur. But neither have we occasion to take any
possibility of this kind into account. We need no assumption
but one, which every one must allow to be moderate and
probable, viz. that while this process of the formation of the
Nation of the Israelites was going on, the average number of
indi-viduals in every family was six, two of the parents and
four of the children.
(107.) I shall now proceed to shew, in what manner, by
simply taking these three conditions or laws of the process
along with us perpetually, we may approximate at least to an
explanation of the result; calculated to give us a general
idea of the way in which it must have actually been brought
about. And we shall assume for that purpose, that each of
the Tribes had one founder respectively — and we shall trace
the increase of each, from this one founder, through the same

QUEST. X.] Increase of the Tribes in Egypt. 75
steps of descent, and more or less at the same rate of increase,
down to the last before the Exodus, in all alike, — and we shall
then multiply the resulting numbers of this last generation, in
each uistance, by the actual number of the founders of the
Tribe in each instance also — which should give us the total
increase of the Tribe in question, down to the Exodus, accord
ing to our calcidation : and from the comparison of this, with
the actual increase at the same time, specified by Scripture
itself, we shaU be enabled to judge of the truth of our own
calculations, at last, and therefore previously also.

76 Historical Character qf the Pentateuch, [quest
(108.) Table A. — Founders ofthe Tribes in Egypt, and increase

X.

of each.

i
ii

Founders,

Number.

Increase.

Eeuben : — Hanoch, Phallu, Hezron, Carmi.
Gen. xlvi. 9, Exod. vi. 14, Numb. xxvi. s, 6, i Cliron. v.3.

4

46500

Simeon : — Jemuel, Jamin, Ohad, Jachin, Zohar,
Shaul. Gen. xlvi. 10, Exod. vi 15, Numb. xxvi. 12, 13.

6

59300

iii iv

Levi : — Gershon, Kohath, Merari.
Gen. xlvi. 11, Exod, vi. 16, Numb. iii. 17, i Chron. vi. i.
Numb. iii. iJ-.^Q-

(3)

(22 000)

Judah : — Shelah, Pharez, Zarah, (Hezron, Hamul.)
Gen. xlvi. 12, Numb. xxvi. 20, 21, i Chron. ii. 3-5.

S

74600

V

Issachar : — Tolah, Phuvah, Job, Shimron.
Gen. xlvi. 13, Numb. xxvi. 23, 24, i Chron. vii. i.

4

54400

vi

Zebulun : — Sered, Elon, Jahleel.
Gen. xlvi. 14, Numb. xxvi. 26.

i

57 400

vii

Gad : — Ziphion, Haggi, Shuni, Ezbon, Eri, Arodi,
Areli. Gen. xlvi. 16, Numb. xxvi. 15-17.

1

45650

viii

AsHEB. : — Jimnah, Ishuah, Isui, Beriah, (Heber,
Malchiel.) Gen. xlvi. 1 7, Numb. xxvi. 44, 45, i Chron. vii, 30.

6

41500

ix

Joseph : — Manasseh.
Gen. xlvi. 20, Numb. xxvi. 28-33.

I

32200

X

Joseph : — Ephraim.
Gen. xlvi. 20, Numb. xxvi. 28,35, 3^*

1

40500

xi

Benjamin : — Belah, Becher, Ashbel, Gera, Naaman,
Ehi, Eosli, Muppim, Huppim, Ard.
Gen. xlvi. 21, Numb. xxvi. 38-40, 1 Chron. vii. 6-12,
viii. I, 2.

10

3S400

xii

Dan : — Hushim.
Gen. xlvi. 23, Numb. xxvi. 42.

I

63 700

xiii

Naphtali: — Jahzeel, Guni, Jezer, Shillem.
Gen. xlvi. 24, Numb. xxvi. 48, 49, 1 Chron. vii. 13.

4

53 400

Total

55

603 550*

* See the next pane,

QUEST. X.] Increase of the Tribes in Egypt. 77

* The particular numbers in each of the above instances, and the sum total of
all collectively are given, once in the account of the census, Nurab. i. 1-46 : and
then again, in the account of the four camps, Numb. ii. 3-9, 10-16, 18-24, 25-31 :
and the general number in each of these instances is the sum total of the parti
cular ones ; so that each confirms the other. This general number is further
checked and confirmed by the number of Bekahs, or half-shekels, paid by each of
the individuals who made it up; Exod. xxxviii. 26, 603550 also. Reduced
to the shekel and the talent of the sanctuary, these amounted to 1 00 talents,
and 1775 shekels, xxviii. 25. And 603,550 half-shekels being equal to 301,775
shekels, if 3000 shekels of the sanctuary went to one talent of the sanctuary,
301,77s shekels would be just equal to 100 talents, and 1775 shekels over of
another. ¦We may reckon it therefore absolutely certain that both the particular numbers
which represent the male and adult part of each of the Twelve Tribes, and the
general numbers, which represent the male and adult population of all of them
collectively, at the Exodus, even as read in the Pentateuch at present, are genuine
and authentic. Exceptions have been taken to these numbers, (Colenso, 50,) as
being all of them multiples of ten or fifty ; and so undoubtedly they are : and yet,
if there is no reason to call in question the readings of the numbers in the text at
present, whatever explanation is to be given of that phenomenon, perceptible in
them eJI, it cannot affect the question of the truth of the numbers themselves.
The same phenomenon is perceptible in another instance — that of the number of
the Levites, from one month old and upwards, 22,000 — of the genuineness of
which as it stands, notwithstanding, there is even less reason to doubt, checked
and conflrmed as it is by that ofthe firstborn ofthe other Tribes, 22,273.
If the Providential element in this oeconomy of the increase of the Tribes is to
be purposely left out of sight, it might well be difficult to account for this remark
able phenomenon, on any other principle ; but allowance being made for the con
stant presence and influence of such a principle of causation and direction as the
Divine Providence, it is easUy explained. The numbers of the increase, both in
the details and in the sum total, must have been pm-posely accommodated to
the Decadal division — and very probably with a prospective view to that
distribution of the whole of the adult male population into tens, and flfties,
and hundreds, and thousands, which, as it appears from Exod, xviii. 25, Deut. i.
1 5, was actuaUy made at last.
And if the increase of the people was thus regulated from the first by a pro
spective regard to this number, it would be only consistent with such a principle
that its decrease also, whether in the ordinary, or in any extraordinary way,
should have been regulated by a similar respect to the Decadal division. And
that would account for the fact that in the second numbering also. Numb. xxvi.
2-51, both the particular numbers and the general numbers, (the sum total of the
particular, in this instance as well as in the former,) were alike divisible by ten.
It would account also for the fact that on those occasions, when the numbers of
the congregation are seen to have been suddenly diminished by any special judg
ment — if the numbers so cut off are specified, as at Numb. xvi. 49 (14,700), and
xxv. 9 (24,000), these too are such as to be divisible by ten.

(109.) Table '&.— Increase of the Tribes in Egypt, B.C. lyjS—B.C. 1560.
Number qf Generations, thirteen complete. Average length qf the

{all except Levi, Dan, Manasseh, and Ephraim.)
Generation, sixteen or fifteen years.

Gen.

B.C.

Descent.

Reuben.

Simeon,

Judah.

Issachar.

Zebulun.

Gad.

Asher.

Benjamin.

Naphtali.

i

1778

Year. I

I X 2

1x2

1 X 2

I X 2

I X 2

1 X2

I X 2

I X2

1 X 2

ii

1761

iS

2x2

2x2

2x2

2x2

2X2

2X2

2X2

2X2

2X2

iii

1744

35

4x2

4x2

4x2

4x2

4X2

4X2

4X2

4X2

4X2

iv

1727

52

8x2

8x2

8x2

8x2

8X2

8X2

8X2

8X2

8X2

V

1710

69

16x2

16x2

16 X 2

16 X 2

16 X 2

i6x 2

16X2

16X2

16x2

vi

1693

86

32x2

32x2

32x2

32x2

32X2

32x2

32X2

32 X 2

32x2

vii

1676

'03

64 X 2

64 X 2

64 X 2

64 X 2

64 X 2

64x2

64X2

64 X 2

64 X 2

viii

1659

120

128 y 2

128 X 2

128 X 2

128 X 2

128X2

128x2

128X2

128X2

128X2


ix

1642

137

256 X 2

256x2

256x2

256 X 2

256X2

256x2

256X2

256X2

256X2

X

1625

154

512x2

512 X 2

512x2

512x2

512X2

512X 2

512X1.5

SI2X 2

512X2

xi

1608

171

1024X 2-5

I 024 X 2.5

I 024 X a-s

I 024 X 3

I 024 X 2-5

I 024 X 2

768X2

I 024 X 1-5

1024X3

xii

1592

187

2 560 X 3

2560X 2-5

2 560 X 3

3072x1.5

2560x2.5

2 048 X 2

1536X3

1536XI-5

3072X1-5

xiii

1576

203

7 680 X 1.5

6400X 1-5

7 680 X 2

4 608 X 3

6 400 X 3

4096x1-5

4608X 1-5

2304X 1.5

4 608 X 3

xiv

1560

219

II 520x4

9 600 X 6

15 360 X 5

13824x4

19 200x3

6144X7

6912 X 6

3456 X 10

13824X4

TrueDiff

46 080
46500

5760059300

76800
74600

55296
54 400

57600
57400

4300845650

41472
41500

34560
35400

5529653400

420

I 700

2 200

896

200

2 642

28

840

1896

QUEST. X.] Increase of the Tribes in Egypt. 79
(110.) The above scheme is not intended to shew the num
ber of those who were actually li-ving, but simply that of those
who were li-ving, and fifteen or sixteen years of age, at the
beginning of each of these periods, from B.C. 1778 to B.C.
1560. Its object is merely to shew in what manner, on the
very moderate and reasonable supposition of one founder for
each of the Tribes, of the age of fifteen or sixteen years, at the
begianing of the first of these periods, and two at the begin
ning of the second, four at the beginning of the third, and so
on, perpetually, the increase of each might easily accumulate
to the number actually assigned it by Seripture itself, at last.
(111.) Though then no uninspired person could be authorized
to say, that either this scheme, or any other which might be
devised at the present day, represented the actual eeconomy of
the process, which must have been going on all the time,
(under the direction of the Di-vine Providence,) for the
augmentation of the diflPerent Tribes ; yet that even this may
be competent to convey an idea of what the actual process
itself, both in the principle and in the details, might have
been, and probably was, cannot be denied. If so, it is sufii
cient for our purpose — as far as it goes — viz. to account for
the increase of nine out of the twelve or thirteen Tribes, to
the required extent, and within the prescribed time, in question.
Let us now proceed to consider that of the remaining four.

80

Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xi.

Question XI.— Increase of the Tribes which had one founder
only, Dan, Manasseh, and Ephraim; and that of the Tribe of
Levi. (Colenso, ch. xviii. pp. 107-112.)

"6

%

a.

^

W*

^.

^.

-i^

-"I

"<

p:

s:

^¦

P

8^
M
tn -J ON
tn
NO
ON
000
ON
to
tn
M
ON to
NO
ONON
ON
NO io
0
to
On
00
CO
p
C3?5
0
to
00
¦<r
to
to
0
0
to
00ON
S'
tn to
Ojtn
00
wj
0
ON
1
OS800
to X
tnOntn X
ONX
to
tn
NO to
X
uo
NO ONXto
4^to toX
tw
toONX to
toX
to
to ON
X to
to
X
to
On Xtd
toX
to
X td
0p3
0
VO 4-
to M8
i
0ON 00
X
tM
00X
tu -(*-
tn OnX
to
ccX(0
00
X to
4^to to
Xto
ONX t3
00
to ONX to
toX
to
ONX to
td
X
to
Xto
1
NO
¦fetn 8
to 00X
to
ON
NO wX
to ONX
10
00X to
00Xto
4»-
to toX
to ON
X to
10
X
Oo
to ONXto
to
>^
Oo
On Xto
to X
to
X Id
1 3
»3
to ON
008
00
tn tu 0\X M
tx\
tnto OnX
to
tn
0to
4* X
tA
tn to
Xto
to
tn On Xto
tO
00 Xto
X
to toX to
ONXto
00Xto
4^ X to
toX to
X to
1
tw 00
tn 8
8
00000XM
tA
tn X to
ON 00
X
tA
t« toX
tn
to
tn ONXto
00
X to
X
to roXto
ONXto
ODXto
Xtd
toX td
X td
CD
I
tn On
ON 00
OS
-1^
0
NO ONX
tj»
to0
%, X
0
4^ X to
tn to Xto
to
tn ONX to
to00Xto
Xto
to toX
to
ONX to
00
X to
X to
toXto
I-lX
I
^
1— '
to
g
^J

s
00
Kl
5^
H
'S
0
t>
Sw
5
=S.
ri
0
r-t.
H
1
Cn
S^
8^
^
'^
*s
?
n,
iS
^
^
0
(M
Sl
^
i*
^
N
s-
1
^
St
Ss
0
^
c^'
Sv,
?**
k
v<
c^,
s
SA.
t
b(
c2
«!
>
1*.
§
'^
bH
1?*,
S- ?^
QUEST. XI.] Increase of Dan, Manasseh, Ephraim, Levi. 81
(113.) If the growth of the Tribes in Egypt had been left
from the first to the ordinary laws, which appear to regulate
the increase of the human species at present ; one of the most
natural and obvious ofthe anticipations, whicii eould have been
formed of the result, would have been this, that those Tribes
which had the fewest founders would be seen to have increased
leastj and those whieh had most to have increased most. On
this principle the Tribe of Benjamin, which had ten founders,
ought to have been the raost numerous ; and the Tribes of Dan,
Manasseh, and Ephraim, each of which had only one founder,
(io8), ought to have been the least numerous : yet, though
Benjamin was certainly somewhat more numerous at the
Exodus than Manasseh, he was much less so than Ephraim ;
and Dan, who had only one son, Hushim, at the Descent, B.C.
1778, had 63,700 sprung from his loins, B.C. 1559 — almost
as many as Judah, through his five sons or grandsons, 74,600.
No doubt, to one who should look at the whole of this oeco
nomy from a merely human point of -view, this must appear
very unaccountable j but to an enlightened and believing mind,
which has learnt to see and to recognize the finger of God in
every thing, these seeming anomalies will look merely as if
they were designed on purpose to teach us, that it was as easy
for God to fulfil his o-wn promises, and to work out his own
ends, with the smallest amount of means, to all human appre^
hension, as -with the greatest.
(114.) But whatsoever may have been the reasons of those
distinctions whieh the comparative numbers of the diflerent
Tribes defacto exhibited at last, (reasons kno-wn in their ful
ness only to God,) all we have to do in these three instances
also of Dan, Manasseh, and Ephraim, is to account for the
results, on the same principles on which we have endeavoured
to explain and account for them in the case of the other nine
Tribes ; and this has been done in the preceding Table C (112),
but with some modification of the general principle of the
other Table, which I have eonsidered myself justified in
making in this, in order to adapt it to the exceptional charac
ter of these particular cases : that viz. of assuming that, while
the number of generations, and the average length of each,
should be the same in these cases as in all the rest, the rate
of the increase in successive generations, in these particular
G

82 Historical Character qf the Pentateuch, [quest, xi.
instances, should be half as much again as in all before. In
other words, that the male population of these three Tribes,
Dan, Manasseh, and Ephraim, instead of doubling itself with
every generation, should double and treble itself alternately.
(115.) With respect to the Tribe of Le-vi, the disproportion
of the increase of this Tribe, under the very same circum
stances, in comparison of that of the others whieh had no
more founders than this — or even fewer — from which Dr. Co
lenso, regarding the whole of this oeconomy as an ordinary
process of its kind, (126. 132), draws conclusions so prejudi
cial to the historical truth of these accounts, is in reality the
strongest internal evidence of their credibility.
(116.) It appears from the subsequent history of all the
Tribes, that the Tribe of Levi was taken and consecrated to
God, in lieu of the firstborn males of all the rest ; and there
fore we may presume was always intended to be so. It ap
pears too that the number of these firstborn, from one month
old and upwards, was exactly 32,273? ^^^ the number of the
Levites, males, from one month old and upwards, it also
appears, was 32,000. Can any one doubt that these numbers
must have been purposely accommodated to each other ? and
consequently the increase of the Tribe of Levi in particular
must have been so regulated all along, that it should bear this
proportion at last to the firstborn of the rest ? Suppose the
case to have been otherwise, and Levi, as setting out B. C.
1778 from three founders, to have gone on increasing like
Zebulun, who did the same, to 57,000 B. C. 1560, and yet
the same eeconomy, of the consecration of this tribe instead
of the firstborn of the rest, to have required to be carried out
at last — ^What would have been the anomaly which must have
been exemplified thereby? What, but that 57,000 Levites
and upwards must have been taken as no more than equivalent
to 22,373 firstborn of the rest of the Tribes? more than
two souls of the most sacred Tribe for every firstborn of the
rest. (117.) According to the Table then (C. 113), the number
of the Kohathites at the Exodus was 8064 ; that of the Ger-
shonites 7300 ; that of the Merarites 6144. The actual num
ber of the Kohathites, Numb. iii. 38, as the text stands at
present, was 8600 ; that of the Gershonites, iii. 32, 7500 ; that

quest. XII.] Ins/Uuliou of the Passover. 83
of the Merarites, iii. 34, 6200. But these numbers added toge
ther make up 33,300 ; whereas the actual number of the Le
vites, from a month old and upwards, iii. 39. 43. 46, was 33,000
only. There must consequently be an error of excess in the
numbers in these other instances, amounting in all to 300 —
and this error, instead of being distributable in any propor
tion among them all, I should conjecture to reside exclusively
in the numbers assigned to Kohath, 8600, instead of 8300 —
produced probably by some confusion between the Hebrew
numeral for three and that for si.x'^.

Question XII. — The Institution of the Passover.
(Colenso, ch. x. pp. 54—60.)

(118.) The difliculties raised by Dr. Colenso on the above
question, and on many more connected with it, an account of
* It is here to be oberved that, besides the numbers" of these several
families of the Levites, (the Kohathites, Gershonites, and Merarites,) from
one month old and upwards, (amounting in all to 22,000,) their numbers
are also given from thirty years old to fifty, respectively. And these stood
as follows — Numbers iv. 35, 36 . . Kohathites, . . , . . . 2750
 39, 40 . . Gershonites, . . . . . . 2630
 43, 44 . . Merarites, . . . , . . 3200

Numbers iv. 47, 48 . . Sum of all . . . . 85-80
And this brings a remarliable fact to light, viz. that whereas at the time
of this census, (B.C. 1559, in the case of them all alike,) the entire popu
lation of the Merarites, from a month old and upwards, 6200, was 2100
less than that of the Kohathites (8300) — the number of adults, Merarites,
from thirty to fifty, 3200, was 450 more than the number of adults, Ko
hathites, from thirty to fifty also, 2750. This at first sight would look
like an inconsistency. If the reader however will turn to the Table
(C 112) he will see that the number of Kohathites, B.C. 1592, the epoch
of the xii generation in the Table, being only 1536, and that of the Mera
rites at the same time being 2048^-these latter at that time would exceed
the fonner by 512. It is evident then that, according to our Table, thirty-
two or thirty-three years after B.C. 1592 — (B.C. 15,59—) there would be
512 Merarites, between the ages of thirty and fifty, more than Kohathites
— and that is only sixty-two more than those which actuallj', according to
the numbers in Scripture given above, existed at that time.
G 2

84 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xn.
which will foUow by and by, are so peculiar, and founded on
so strange a misconstruction of the testimony of Scripture
itself, that, in order to guard myself against the suspicion of
having mistaken or misrepresented the author's meaning, I
must state them in his own words.
(119.) i. p. 54 {6e,). After quoting Exod. xii. 31-28, he ob
serves upon it, " That is to say, in one single day, the whole
immense population of Israel, as large as that of London, was
instructed to keep the Passover, and actually did keep it. I
have said, ' in one single day -,' for the first notice of any such
Feast to be kept is given in this very chapter, where we find
it written, v. 13, '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.' -"-"
ii. p. 55 {6^). " Let us now see what the above statement
really implies, when translated into simple every-day matter
of fact. {66), ' Moses called for all the elders of Israel.' We
must suppose, then, that the ' elders' lived somewhere near
at hand. But where did the two millions live ? And how
could the order, to keep the Passover, have been conveyed,
with its minutest particulars, to each individual household in
this vast community, in one day, — rather, in twelve hours,
since Moses received the command on the very same day on
which they were to kill the Passover at even, E. xii. 6."
iii. p. 60 (73). "And then we are to believe that every
single household, throughout the entire country {county), was
warned in twelve hours to keep the Feast of the Passover,
was taught how to keep it, and actually did keep it ; and that,
further, they were warned again at midnight, to start at once
in hurried flight for the -wilderness, when each family was
shut up closely in its own house, and strictly forbidden to
come out of it till summoned, and they could not, therefore,
communicate the tidings freely, as by day, from one person to
a number of others."
iv. p. 61 (74). "Here, then, we have this vast body of
people of all ages, summoned to start, according to the story,
at a moment's notice, and actually started, not one being left
behind, together with all their multitudinous flocks and herds,
which must (73) have been spread out over a district as large
as a good sized English county."

quest. XII.] Institution of the Passover. 85
V. p. 63 (75)- " But this is but a very small part of the
difliculty. We are required to believe that, in one single
day, the order to start was communicated suddenly, at mid
night, to every single family of every town and village,
throughout a tract of country as large as Hertfordshire, but
ten times as thickly peopled j — that, in obedience to such
order, having first ' borrowed' vei-y largely from their Egyp
tian neighbours in all directions,  they then came in from
all parts ofthe land of Goshen to Rameses, bringing with them
the sick and infirm, the young and the aged ; — further, that,
since receiving the summons, they had sent out to gather in
all their flocks and herds, spread over so wide a district, and
had driven them also to Rameses ; — and, lastly, that having
done all this, since they were roused at midnight, they were
started again from Rameses that very day, and marched on
to Succoth, not leaving a single sick or infirm person, a single
woman in childbirth, or even ' a single hoof,' E. x. 36, behind
them." vi. p. 63 (76). " This is, undoubtedly, what the story in
the book of Exodus requires us to believe."
(120.) Such is Dr. Colenso's construction and version of
the story in the book of Exodus, and such is the confidence
with which the truth of the version is asserted. In opposition
to this confident assertion, it shall be my endeavour, with God's
help, to shew that the above is not what the story in the
book of Exodus requires us to believe ; that the above repre
sentation of the circumstances of the Exodus is merely a
fiction of Dr. Colenso's own imagining — and only one more
specimen of that peculiar manner of reading and reasoning
from the simplest historical statements of Scripture, of exam
ples of which his book is so full.
(121.) To make this appear, let us begin with the assump
tion, which lies at the bottom of all these impossibilities and
these absurdities, consequentially and logically deducible from
it, if true; viz. that the Israelites had only twelve hours no
tice of the Passover, as destined to precede the Exodus, or
only twelve hours notice of the Exodus, as destined to follow
on the Passover. The first thing which we may undertake to
prove is, that they had at least fourteen days notice of both,
even if they had no more.

86 Historical Character of ihe Pentateuch, [quest, xii.
(122.) The first announcement both of the Passover, as
destined to precede the Exodus, and of the Exodus as destined
to follow on the Passover, is contained in Exod. xii. This
chapter opens as follows.
Exod. xii. I : "And the Lord spake unto Moses and Aaron
in the land of Egypt, saying, ver. 3, This month shall le unto
you the beginning of months : it shall le the first month of
the year to you."
Now with respect to the meaning of this opening addi-ess,
it is clear from its own words, that in its primary drift and
reference it must have concerned the calendar of the time being ;
it must have had it in view to prescribe the rule ofthe reckon
ing of civil time, from this time forward, among the Israehtes
in particular. And there are only two constructions, whieh,
with such a drift and reference as that, can be put on the rule,
so prescribed and so enjoined, itself: -viz. either that the month,
which was before the first, — which was still at this time the
first,- — should never cease to be the first, — should always
be reckoned as the first — or that some other month, not
before the first, from this time forward should become
and be reckoned to be, the first. In other words, it must be
evident from the terms of this address itself, that preliminary
to any other injunction, or to any other observance, which it
might be intended to notify on the same occasion, the Deity
was intimating his own -will and pleasure with respect to the
reckoning of civil time among his own people, and either
confirming the style de facto in existence against all possible
change for ever, or correcting the style before in use, by sub
stituting some other in its stead ; and if it can be shewn that,
under the circumstances of the case. He could not have been
doing the former, it will follow that He must have been doing
the latter.
(123.) Now to prove that, under the circumstances of the
case, He could not have been doing the former, all we have to
do is to argue as follows : — If these words were intended sim
ply to confirm the first month of the calendar for the time
being in the possession of its place in the calendar for ever,
they must have been spoken in the first month of the calendar
of the time being — and the month in whieh they were spoken
having clearly been the month of the Exodus, the first month

QUEST. XII.] Institution of the Passover. 87
of the calendar for the time being and the month of the Exodus
must have been identical. If so, the season of the natural
year, with which the first month of the calendar for the time
was coinciding, was the same with that at which the Exodus
also was taking place ; and the season of the year at whieh
the Exodus was taking place being certainly that of the
spring, the first month of the calendar for the time being, on
this principle, must have been falling in the spring too. And
that would be contradicted by the whole history of the Primi
tive Calendar from the first, until this time itself; according
to which, having once set out at the beginning both of natural
and of human or civil time, on the first day of the natural
year, April 35 at midn. A. M. i, B. C. 4004, and after onee
revolving through all the seasons of the natural year, and
once again returning to the first day of the natural year, — in
the course of a seeond revolution through all the seasons of
the natural year again, in the year of the Exodus, A. M. 2444-
2445, B, C. 1561-1560, it was now falling in the autumn™.
(124.) There would be other difliculties in the above con
struction of Exod. xii. 2. But this alone is competent to
prove that, without calling in question the whole history of
the ci-vil calendar from the beginning of things to the Exodus,
it eould not possibly be true. If then the Deity, in this open
ing address, preparatory to any thing intended to follow, was
correcting the calendar, yet not simply in this way of confirm
ing the style at this time in use for ever. He must have been
changing the style, and appointing the reckoning of civil or
calendar time, among his own people at least, from this time
forward to begin and proceed from some epoch from which it
was not beginning or proceeding previously ".
(125.) This point then being established, that the first and
most immediate object of the address in Exod. xii. was to
constitute some month, not before the first, from that time
forward, the first; one of the most natural inferences frpm
that state of the case, which could possibly suggest itself, is
this — that the day on which this change of the style was en
joined, and the day on which it was intended to begin, must
have been the same. " This month shall be unto you the be
ni Cf. my Fasti Catholici, ii. 207, and my Tliree Witnesses, p. 84.
"' See my Three Witnesses, So-89.

s

88 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xii.
ginning of months ; it shall be the first month of the year to
you." Such language on the first day of the new first month
would be consistent and natural ; but not so on any day of
this month later than the first — on any such day, for instance,
as the fourteenth °, (the day on which Dr. Colenso must sup
pose these words to have been spoken,) when the month itself
— now for the first time constituted the first— was already
half over.
(126.) This assumption then, that whatsoever the month,
appointed to be the first in the calendar from this time for
ward, instead of that which before was so, the words which
announced the fact of this constitution, Exod. xii. 3, must
have been delivered on the first day of this month, being taken
along with us ; let us continue our review of the chapter itself
from wliere we left it off". Exod. xii. 3 ; " Speak ye unto all
the congregation of Israel, saying. In the tenth day of this
month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according
to the house of their fathers, a lamb for an house .... ver. 6,
And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same
month ; and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel
shall kill it in the evening," {between the two evenings.)
(127.) Knowing that these words were spoken on the first
day of this month, could any one hesitate to infer from them
that the notice, to take up these lambs on the tenth of the
month, must have been given ten days beforehand ? and the
notice, to sacrifice them on the fourteenth of the month, must
have been given fourteen days beforehand ? If not, what is to
be thought ofthe assertion, so confidently proposed {6^), that
all the notice which the people received, both that they were
to take up and set apart these lambs, for a certain purpose,
and to keep them set apart, for that purpose, and to sacrifice
them at last, for that end and purpose, was onlj- the last twelve
hours before the Exodus ? Dr. Colenso is pleased to observe,
P- 55 {^5)> on these several directions, "It is true that the
story, as it now stands, with directions about ' taking' the
lamb on the tenth day, and ' keeping' it fill the foiu-teenth,
are {sic) perplexing and contradictory :" andperplcving for his
own Jiurpose, and contradictory to his own hypothesis, of only
o Cf. my Three Witnesses, pp. 84. 94-96.

QUEST. XII.] Institution of the Passover. 89
a twelve hours' notice between the issuing of these orders and
the Exodus, they may well be said to be ; but perplexing that
they are in themselves, or contradictory in any the least
degree, inter se, I utterly deny.
(1 28.) What then, it may be demanded, has he to say in
his o-wn excuse for so strange a misconstruction of the plain
testimony of the story, as that of ignoring a ten days' notice
to set apart the lambs for the Passover, and a four days' notice
more to keep them so set apart, and a fourteen days' notice to
sacrifice and eat them at last ? " I have said," he observes,
p. 54 {6^), " 'in one single day;' for the first notice of any
such Feast to be kept is given in this very chapter, where
we find it written, zi. I2, '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.' "
So then, because God, to whom the most distant future is
as near as the present moment, — to whose apprehension ever
lasting duration itself is only one ever-present now, speaking
of what should be done by himself fourteen days or nights
after this time, speaks of it as if the fourteenth night were
already arrived or at hand, we also are bound to consider the
whole of the interval between the first of the month and the
fourteenth annihilated, and the day of the prediction, the first
of the month, to have been identical with the day of the fulfil
ment, the fourteenth*. On this principle, when our Saviour,
Luke xvii. 34, speaking of the events which should precede
his second coming, uses similar language, I tell you, this
night there shall be two men in one bed — his hearers were
bound to suppose he meant the night of the very day on
which those words were spoken ! But what an ignorance or
disregard, does this construction of ver. 12 shew, of one of
the commonest modes of thought, and one of the commonest
idioms of speech, even where the human apprehension, and
the human anticipation only, of the future are concemed,
whereby a still distant time, with its proper events, is so
often spoken of, and represented, as already come !
(129.) But pp. 54, 55 (65), Dr. Colenso proceeds to observe,
* The same language is used verse 8 also — just before — Belileh hezeh,
this night — though rendered there in the English version, by that night,
and at verse 12 by ihis night.

90 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xii.
" In the chapter preceding, xi. 4, we read, ' And Moses said
(to Pharaoh), Thus saith Jehovah, about midnight -will I go
out into the midst of Egypt, and all the firstborn in the
land of Egypt shall die,' where there can be no doubt that
the ' midnight' then next at hand is intended." And this
is another of the inconsiderate assertions in which this book
abounds. So far from there being no doubt that the mid
night next at hand was intended by these words, there is
every reason to doubt it, or rather it is morally certain that
it could not have been so. First of all, there is no specifica
tion, xi. 4 itself, of the midnight there alluded to, as the mid
night next at hand; and without authority from the text of
Scripture it is gratuitous to assume it was. Secondly, it would
necessitate us to suppose there was only twelve hours' inter
val, if so much, between the plague of darkness and that of the
firstborn. For that Exod. xi. 4-8 is only the supplement of
the account of what passed between Pharaoh and Moses,
Exod. X. 24-29, as before related, either on the third day of
the plague of darkness, or on the day after it, appears from
xi. 8 : " And he (i. e. Moses) went out from Pharaoh in a
great anger," compared with x. 29, which proves that, if
Exod. xi. 4-8 was not spoken while Moses was still in the
presence of Pharaoh, (as he was, at x. 34-39,) it never could
have been spoken in his presence at all — and that would be
contradictory to xi. 4—8 itself; which proves that it 2vas deli
vered while Moses was stiU in his presence.
(130.) The truth is, xi. 4-8 is properly supplementary to
the account of what actually passed at this last interview of
Moses with the king of Egypt, as related x. 34-39, at the
end of the plague of darkness — and xi. 4 should be read con
tinuously on X. 29. That is, xi. 1-3, as it stands, being con
sidered simply parenthetic, xi. 4-8 -will take up and explain
more circumstantially what is implied even at x. 39, in the
account of that final interview. And xi. 1-3 (cf. xi. 9 also)
seems to have been purposely interposed between x. 39 and
xi. 4, to account for the prediction of the one judgment more
after this of the darkness, as still in reserve for the Egjqitians
— delivered by Moses on this very occasion, xi. 4-8 — and con
sequently for the knowledge of it by Moses, even before this
final interview. But though Moses at this time was certainly

QUEST. XIII.] Circumstances preliminary to the Exodus. 91
aware of the futurity of that last judgment, in general, and
of such of its circumstances as are specified xi. 4-8, there
is no reason to suppose that even he yet knew more of the
time when it was destined to happen in particular, than that
it would be at midnight on some day or other, though on
what day he did not yet know. This further circumstance
of the threatened visitation, the most important and interest
ing, both to the Egyptians and the Israelites, of all, it is
manifest the Deity was still reserving for the time when it
should be announced by himself, along with the correction of
the calendar, and the institution of the Passover.
(131.) Laying then these se-veral considerations together, I
think we may safely come to the conclusion that, if any one
thing may more certainly than another be collected from the
Scripture narrative of the proceedings more immediately pre-
liminai-y to the Exodus, it is this, that, instead of one day's
notice only of this event as at hand, the people had fourteen
days' notice at least, from the first to the fifteenth of the
first Abib, Exod. xii. i-i3, and virtually besides, the whole of
the interval, whatsoever it was, between Exod. x. 29 and
xii. 1, from the end of the plague of Darkness to the inflic
tion of that of the Firstborn. I shall now proceed to the
proof of another point, which, if it can be substantiated, will
be still more decisive of the great hallucination under which
the author of the Pentateuch critically examined has laboured
in this part of his Review — the fact that instead of one day's
notice, or fourteen days', or twice fourteen days', notice, of such
an event as the Exodus, and of the preparations which would
require to be made against its arrival, the people in Egypt
had three quarters of a year's notice, 269 days at least.

Question XIII. — On the true interval of Time taken up by the
Circumstances preliminary to the Exodus.
(Colenso, ch. x. pp. 54-60.)

(132.) When Moses, Exod. iii. and iv., had finally accepted
his designation as the future deliverer ofthe people of Israel,

92 Historical Character of ihe Pentateuch, [quest, xiii.
and was now ready to enter on the discharge of its duties, the
first thing enjoined upon him after his return to Egypt, Exod.
iii. i6 ; iv. 1-17, was " To gather the elders of Israel together,
and to declare his commission to them," and to work for their
conviction the signs whieh he had been empowered to work,
Exod. iv. 1-9. And we read accordingly, iv. 29, 30, that the
first thing which he and Aaron did, on their return, was to
gather those elders together, and to do these signs before then-
eyes. And though nothing is said, iv. 29, ofany preliminary
assembling of the people also, yet that the gathering of the
elders together on sueh an occasion, and for such a purpose as
this, was intended to include, and actually must have included,
the people also, may be inferred from iii. 15^ 16, clearly imply
ing that this was always intended to be done, and iv. 30, 31,
equally clearly implying that it was done — " That Aaron spake
all the words which the Loed had spoken unto Moses, and did
the signs, (which they had been commissioned to do,) in the
sight of the people;" and "That the people, having heard
those words and seen those signs, believed," and being now
convinced that the Loed had indeed visited them, and looked
upon their afiliction, in humble and grateful acknowledgment
of his mercy, " bowed the head and worshipped."
(133.) Now it requires no argument to prove that if these
things were said and done in the presence of all the people, all
the people must either have been pre-viously assembled in some
quarter where they could be said and done before them all ; or
must have been purposely assembled in some quarter, in order
that they might be said or done before them. And ofthese two
suppositions we shall see by and by that the former was more
strictly the case ; that the people were already assembled in a
certain locality in the land of Goshen, which will be explained
as we proceed, before Moses and Aaron appeared among them.
The question is then whether, having once received such an
announcement of their apjiroaching deliverance, and conse
quent departure from Egypt, all in a body, while they were
thus assembled in a certain localitj-, they could ever after cease,
as a body, to expect their deliverance and their departure ; or
ever after cease, as a body, to make the necessary preparations
on their part for it.
(13-J'.) It is very true that the appearance of Moses and

quest. XIII.] Circumstances preliminary to the Exodus. 93
Aaron, with the first actual announcement of their commis
sion, before the King of Egypt, and the first actual demand
that he should let the people go, in its immediate consequences,
was so far from confirming the expectation thus raised of the
approaching deliverance of the nation, that it seemed to fore
bode nothing so much as the hopeless continuance of the same
state of subjection and bondage to their taskmasters, on harder
terms for themselves than before. But this was before the
proper judgment had yet followed on the first refusal of the
demand; and consequently before any proof had thus been
given that Moses and Aaron, in preferring this demand, were
only the instruments of an Higher Power, both able and ready
to resent and punish disobedience to the demands of his
messengers, as an aflft-ont and an injury done to himself.
Before the infiiction on the refusal of this first of its proper
penalties, the language of Pharaoh to Moses and Aaron was
that of indignant remonstrance, that they should thus have
interfered -with the ordinary services of the people, v. 4 :
" Wherefore do ye, Moses and Aaron, let the people from their
works ? . . . ver. 5, Behold, the people of the land now are
many, and ye make them rest from their burdens" — i. e. Ye
have already unsettled them, ye have already unfitted them
for their proper duties, by filling their minds with vain and
unfounded expectations. And his language to his own sub
jects at the same time was, ver. 7j " Ye shall no more give
the people straw to make brick, as heretofore : . . . ver. 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 be idle ; therefore they cry, saying. Let us go and
sacrifice to our God." And his language to the Israelitish
overseers of the people, when they complained to him of the
hardness and unreasonableness of such treatment, was in the
same strain; ver. 17, "^ Ye are idle, ye are idle; therefore je
say. Let us go and do sacrifice unto the Loed : . . . ver. 1 8, Go
therefore now, and work; for there shall no straw be given
you, yet shall ye deliver the tale of bricks."
(135.) But after this first refusal and the judgment upon
it, we read no more of any complaints about interference with
the ordinary duties of the people to the Egyptians, no more
of any insinuations about their idleness and unwillingness to

94 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch, [quest, xiii.
work. It was evidently from this time forward a question be
tween the King of Egypt and the God of the Hebrews,
whether the latter by his power should compel the King of
Egypt to an unconditional surrender of his people, bodily and
for ever, or the King of Egypt by his obstinacy should wear
out the power of God, or by his policy elude the eflect of a
forced compliance with his will, by retaining such an hold
upon the people, that though let go nominally, and for a -time,
they must come back again — as once he proposed to do after
the plague of hail, and in apprehension of the plague of locusts,
if they would have left their little ones as hostages, and again,
after the plague of darkness, ifthey would have left their cattle
behind. (136.) Itis clear then that from the beginning of these pro
ceedings -with the plague of Blood, the question at issue both
really was, and was understood on both sides to be, the de
parture of the whole nation of the Israehtes from the midst of
their former masters, not for a temporary purpose, not for a
season, but for good and for ever. It is no objection that
Exod. V. 3 ; iii. 1 8, even the iirst demand ran in the terms of
"Let us go, we pray thee, three days' journey into the desert,
and sacrifice unto the Loed our God" — for no promise to come
back, after the performance of this act of worship, nor any
engagement to go no further into the desert than this three
days' journey, when it was over, was implied in those words.
And such being the state of the case, and such the question at
issue, from this time forward, is it conceivable that the whole
nation, though previously assembled before the beginning of
this contest, and previously made aware of their personal
interest in its decision, convinced too from the very first, that
their God was in earnest in demanding and enforcing theii-
deliverance — would stand by — from the beginning to the
end of the struggle — merely looking on, as admiring specta
tors of some astonishing and wonderful drama, ia which God
and the King of Egypt were the principal actors, without
taking a single step, in the way of preparation, while the con
test was still going on, against the time of its decision ?
(137.) It is no answer to say, the first demand that they
should be let go had to be repeated ten times, before it pro
duced the desired effect. Was it preferred at first, or in

quest, xiii.] Circumstances pireliminary to the Exodus. 95
any subsequent instance, except in the expectation that it
would be complied with, or at least with the presumption
that it might be ? If not, then the people would require to
be prepared for such a contingency, as that of their being at
liberty to depart, at any one of those ten epochs in this event
ful year, made by so many demands. Nor is it any answer to
say that God himself (Exod. iii. 19, 30) had forewarned Moses,
and Moses might have forewarned the people, that one only
of a series of judgments would be found effectual in extort
ing the consent of the Egyptians to their departure. It does
not appear that even after xi. 1-3, or rather before xii. 1-12,
the Deity had yet told Moses what that judgment would be, and
when it was to be expected ; and until that information had
been vouchsafed, for aught that Moses or the people yet knew,
every judgment in succession after the first might be that one
which was destined to be effectual ; and against every judg
ment after the first would the people be bound to be prepared
as for the last, and to be in a condition to take instant ad
vantage of it, if it should be the last. So that instead of that
one brief day of twelve hours, which is all that Dr. Colenso
allows for so complicated a business as this of putting a milUon
and upwards of human souls, with a proportionate number
of flocks and herds, into a proper state for migrating from the
land of their nati-vity, in a body, and for a foreseen sojourn of
indefinite duration in the wilderness of Arabia, the true length
of the period of notice and of preparation, which the Divine
Providence placed at their disposal, was the interval between
the first of the plagues and the last — whatsoever that was.
Let us then proceed to consider whether it does not admit of
being determined.
(138.) Now the date of the Exodus having been forty years
before that of the Eisodus, and the true year of the Eisodus
being infaUibly detei-mined by the first of the two miracles,
affecting the sunP, to B. C. 1520, the year of the Exodus must
have been B. C. 1560, and the year before the Exodus B.C.
1561. I had occasion to consider the chronology of this year —
so much of it at least as was taken up by the events in Egypt,
preliminary to the Exodus — in my Fasti Catholici 1; and to
P Three Witnesses, p. 98 sqq. 1 ii. 218-228.

96 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch. [quest, xiii.
that work, for more particular explanations, I beg to refer
the reader.
(139.) It has been shewn in that work that two criteria,
from which a correct idea of the true time of the beginning,
and the true time of the ending, of these proceedings, rela
tively to the natural year, may even now be formed, have
been specified by Seripture itself; one, Exod. v. I3, at the very
beginning : " So the people were scattered abroad thoughout
all the land of Egypt, to gather stubble instead of straw;"
the other, ix. 31, just after the seventh plague, the plague of
hail : " And the flax and the barley was smitten ; for the bar-"
ley was in the ear, and the flax was boiled."
(140.) I argued from the former, that the time when the
people were thus scattered throughout all the land of Egypt,
to gather stubble instead of straw, must have been later, on
the one hand, than the usual season of the harvest of both
kinds in Egypt, yet before, on the other, the usual time
of the inundation, and especially that of those parts of the
country on which the corn itself was raised every year. And
I shewed, both from the testimonies of antiquityy and from
modern observation of the fact also, that for such a climate as
that of Egypt, and for this period of mundane time when the
vernal equinox was falling on April 4 or 5, and the summer
solstice on July 6 or 7, this searching for 'stubble on the
corn lands, already cleared of the crops of the year, could not
have begun earlier than the middle of May, nor gone on,
without interruption from the inundation, later than the
middle of August.
(141.) I argued in like manner from the latter, that the
ti^ne of the seventh plague, characterized by such a phenome
non as this of the barley its being in the ear, and of the flax
its being boiled, (i. e. risen up into a round protuberant head,
enclosing the flax,) for the same climate, could not have been
much earlier or much later than the end of February or the
beginning of March. And this inference from the forward'
ness of the flax in particular, at this time, was confirmed by a
case in point, the state of the flax for a climate which could not
have differed materially from that of Egypt— that of Judsea,
round about Jericho — only forty-one years later, and only four
or five days before the passage of the Jordan, at the Eisodus,

QUEST. xiii.J Circumstances preliminary to the Exodus. 9"/'
B. C. 1530 — when the spies were concealed by Rahab under
the stalks of flax, already gathered, and lying at that time on
the top of her house, to be cured in the rays of the sun. This
process, according to Phny the elder, lasted only five or six
days; and the date of the concealment of the spies having
been March 31, this di-ying of the flax on the tops of the
houses, in or about Jericho, could not have begun later than
March 31, and might have begun as early as March 16 or 17.
It is clear then that, for the parts round about Jericho, B. C.
1530, and by parity of reason B.C. 1561 also, it must have
been entirely consistent with the known laws of nature in the
process of maturing this particular vegetable, to represent it
as already boiled even at the end of February or at the begin
ning of March. And if that would have been true of the
climate of Jericho B.C. 1561 or 1560, much more would it be
so of that of On or Heliopolis.
(142.) Laying these two criterions therefore, of the earliest
and the latest limits of the intermediate events, together, we
should be justified in arguing from them that the absolute
interval between the beginning of those proceedings in Egypt
which led to the Exodus at last, and only the seventh of the
plagues which had first to be infiicted, eould not have been
less than the interval between the end of May, or at the
latest, the beginning of August, B. C. 1561, and the end of
February, B.C. 1560. And even after that, there would be
still three more plagues to be taken into account, the plague
of locusts, the plague of darkness, and the plague of the first
born — none of which followed on the preceding, without some
interval between them. So that, to know the entire interval
of time taken up by these proceedings, and consequently the
true lengtii of the period of expectation of the event pre
viously, and of preparation for it also, two data only are
necessary, one the date of the first plague, and the other that
of the last. And on both these points it so happens that we
have not been left to conjecture — rwe are able even at present
to speak with an high degree of confidence, if not with an
absolute certainty.
(143.) It is clear from Exod. vii. 14-35, that the subject of
the first plague was the Waters of Egypt — in which those of
the Nile in particular must have been specially included ; and
H

98 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch. [quest, xiii.
that the duration of this affection of the waters was seven
days. Now it has been shewn r that the oldest of the Na
tional festivals of the Egyptians, and to the nation itself
the most interesting, the Panegyry of the Waters, commemo
rative of the rise of the Nile every year for the seven parallels
of Egypt, must have lasted seven days also. It has been
shewn too*^, that the proper annual solemnity in honour of
the oldest of the sacred animals of the Egyptians, the Mneuis
of On or Heliopolis, under the name of the Natales Mneuidis,
was attached to this Panegyry of the Waters ; and from the
history and explanation of the Mneuis cycle*, it has also
been she-wn that the stated date of these Natales, and conse
quently of this Panegyi-y, being 380 days from October 9 in
every year of the JuUan cycle of leap-year, B.C. 1561 it
must have been July 15, and B. C. 1560, July 16. And that
it was so, in this latter year, the first year of the Exodus, has
been proved from the history of the golden calf, (an image of
the Mneuis itself,) erected this year, and on this day, July 16,
B. C. 1560.
(144.) It is clear, in like manner, from Exod. xii. 3-36,
especially after the explanations premised supra (133 sqq.),
that the date of the last plague having been midnight on
the 15th of the first Abib of the new calendar, reckoned by
the Julian rule, and the first of this first Abib, reckoned by
the same rule, having been March 37 at midnight, the date
of the last plague, the plague of the firstborn, must have
been April 10 at midnight. The entire length of the interval
therefore, taken up by the proceedings which led to the
Exodus at last, beginning -with the first plague and ending
with the tenth, could have been neither more nor less than
the interval from July 15 at midnight, B. C. 1561, to April 10
at midnight, B.C. 1560; that is, 369 days exactly. And the
whole of this interval, as a period of continued expectation
of the Exodus, must in all reason be considered a period of
continued preparation for it also. It is inconceivable that,
after being in daily expectation of such au event for these
nine months, the Israelites should have been as little prepared
r Fasti Catholici, iv. 167 ; cf. 158 sqq., 161 sqq. Three Witnesses, 146 sqq.
s Three Witnesses, p. 150, and Appendix, Note B B.
. t Three Witnesses, pp. 80-84, 94-96.

QUEST. XIV,] March from Egypt. 99
for it on April lo, B. C. 1560, as they might have been on
July 15, B.C. 1561. Common sense must revolt at such a
supposition. On the contrary, to what use or purpose could
this period of suspense and expectation have been so> naturally
devoted on the part of the people, as to that of preparation for
the expected migration ? which it was easy to see, however
delayed for a time by the obstinacy of the Egyptians, must
come at last — such preparation at least as depended on them
selves, and might be left to ordinary human foresight and ordi
nary human precautions ; though on these points too it is not too
much to suppose that ordinary human foresight and human
prudence — while this period of suspense was still continuing —
in their mode of applying it, and rendering it available for
the purpose to which it was intended to be subservient — was
admonished and instructed through Moses by Divine.

Question XIV. — On the March from Egypt, and the Order in
which it ivas made.
(Colenso, ch. xi. pp. 61-64.)

(145.) And this leads me to observe that, among the pro
visions and precautions of this kind, which would be neces
sary beforehand in contemplation of such an extraordinary
contingency as this of the departure of a whole Nation all
at once, with every thing belonging to them, from the land
of their nativity and bringing up — -one of the most obvious —
one of the first to suggest itself to mere human prudence —
(much more to human foresight enlightened and prompted
by Divine — ) would be this, Of the Order and Manner in
whieh they should set out on their departure at first, and the
Order and Manner in which they should ever after move
about from place to place. And though on such a question
as this, there could have been only two alternatives — (between
which the choice might have been safely left to the common
sense of the leaders of the movement at the time — ) and these,
H 3

100 HLfforical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xiv.
Whether the whole of this prodigious population of a million
and a quarter of souls, with a mixed multitude of followers
besides, and flocks and herds propoi-tionally numerous, should
set out at first, and should ever after move about, in one
great and indiscriminate mass; Or, before their departure,
should be divided into a certain number of smaUer and more
convenient bodies, and ever after move about so divided — I
am content to treat this question, if any one -wishes it,
simjjly as one of fact, which must be decided by the testimony
of what Dr. Colenso calls the Story of the .Exodus itself.
(146.) Now that the most numerous assemblage of human
beings, which could be supposed, a priori, capable of being
moved about, subject to the direction of one mind and one
will, with proper arrangements beforehand — -with proper fore
sight to suggest them, and with proper authority to enforce
them — might be transported over any distance of space, and
for any length of time, without any hindrance from their own
numbers at least, is proved by the memorable example of the
army of Xerxes ; the fighting men in which on foot out
numbered the entire population at the Exodus, by almost half
as many again, while the followers and retainers, of every
kind and of every age and sex, as well as of every nation,
according to Herodotus, did not fall short of five or six
millions". And yet the whole of this prodigious multitude —
thanks to the preparations which had been made, and the
arrangements which had been concerted, three or four years
before — was marched at last over the entire distance from
Sardis in Asia to Athens in Greece, and for the whole of
the interval from April 19 to Sept. 36, B. C. 480", at an
equable rate of daily motion, without any inconvenience from
its own unwieldy proportions at least — and as the effect of no
other expedient which history has made known to us, than
this simple and obvious one, of dividing an immense and
unwieldy mass into smaUer and more manageable bodies.
And that these must have been the means resorted to for the
same purpose at the Exodus — that the Israelites did not set
out from Egypt in one large body, but in a number of smaller
bodies, and therefore must have been di-vided, previously to
" Origines Kalendarise Hellenica", i. 368, and » ^ Ibid. i. 361-^80.

QUEST. XIV.] March from Egypt. 101
their departure, into such a number of smaller bodies, may be
argued from the following testimonies.
(147.) i. Exod. vi. 36 : " These are that Aaron and Moses,
to whom the Loed said. Bring out the children of Israel from
the land of Egypt, according to their Aemibs." Cf 13.
ii. Exod. -vii. 4 : " But Pharaoh shall not hearken unto you,
that I may lay my hand upon Egypt, and bring forth mine
Aemies  out of the land of Egypt by great judgments."
iii. Exod. xii. 17 : " For in this selfsame day have I brought
your Aemies out of the land of Egypt."
iv. Exod. xii. 41 : " And it came to pass at the end of the
four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came
to pass, that all the Hosts of the Loed went out from the
land of Egypt, ver. 51, And it came to pass the selfsame
day that the Loed did bring the children of Israel out of the
land of Egypt by their Aemies."
V. Numb. i. 3 : " From twenty years old and upward, all
that are able to go forth to war in Israel : thou and Aaron
shall number them by their Aemies."
(148.) In all these allusions to those who left Egypt at the
Exodus, as an aggregate of a certain kind, the word used
is Tsaba; which properly means a collection, in the sense of
an army; an aggregate of individuals, each of whom is a
soldier, and all together are an host of such individuals — a
collection of individuals enlisted to act as soldiers, composing
a body intended for war, and going forth, if at all, on a
military expedition. And such was the character in which
the Israelites must be regarded as going forth on this occa
sion; viz. to the Wars of the Loed in Canaan. But the
principal thing to be noted in all these allusions is, that the
word, used in them, is not Tsaba in the singular, which would
have described only one Host of this kind, but Tsaiath or
Tsabaoth in the plural, which must denote more than one such
Host at least.
(149.) We may infer from this distinction, and in my
opinion justly, that, if the Israelites left Egypt on this occa
sion in one character and form, applicable to them all col
lectively, as one great host going out to war, they did so
too in the form of such an host as subdivided into, and
made up of, a certain number of smaUer hosts, each of them.

102 Historical CMracter of ihe Pentateuch, [quest. XIV.
it might be, considerable enough to constitute an host or
army by itself; and not in one great host, except as the
aggregate of all these smaller hosts. And that these were
the divisions and distinctions, subject to which, even as one
great host, they must have left Egypt on this occasion, may
be inferred from Numb, xxxiii. i : " These are the joumeys of
the children of Israel, which went forth out of the land of
Egypt, with their Aemies, under the hand of Moses and
Aaron." And that these were not temporary distinctions, but
a characteristic of the journeyings or marchings of the same
body ever after, as one greater host subdivided into a certain
number of smaller hosts, appears from Numb. x. 38.
(150.) This faet then of some subdi-visions of their entire
body, as thus made preliminary to the Exodus, and as still con
tinuing after the Exodus, on the strength of these intimations
being taken for granted ; the next question will be. What was
the number of those subdivisions ?
Now that this number could not have been less than /o«<r,
appears to me to be a necessary inference from the account of
the Camp, and of its component parts. Numb. ii. and x. 11-38.
This account, indeed, as coming in here only in the second
year of the Exodus, is not, nor in the nature of things could
be, the first allusion to the camp as such. The Israelites,
once set in motion, had a camp from the first, — a moving
camp, as often as, and while, they were marching, — a sta
tionary camp, as often as, and while, they were halting. And
the allusions to this camp, between Exod. xii. 37 and this
time in the seeond year, are proportionately numerousy. But
often as it is alluded to before this time, it is only reasonable
to suppose it is as one and the same thing of its kind; and
the difference between those general allusions, in those former
instances, and these more particular ones. Numb. ii. and x,
will be simply this. That, while the former give us to under
stand merely that the people had a camp, and the same kind
of camp, all this time, the latter give us an insight into the
constitution of this camp, both at first and ever after.
(151.) For that the camp, specifically alluded to. Numb. ii.
and X, was not something which came into existence for the
first time in the second year of the Exodus, but the same
y See Needham, Cruden, &c. Camp, Encampment, &c.

quest, xiv.] March from Egypt. 103
vvith which tho people had marched and halted from the
first, appears very plainly from their own testimony. Numb.
ii- 3, 3-9, 10-16, 18-34, 25-31 ; X. 14, 18, 33, 35, which do
not enjoin or describe the formation of an encampment, com
posed of such and such parts, for the first time on this occa
sion, but, recognising the existence of a camp, so composed
already, prescribe merely the order in which each of these
parts should stand from that time forward relatively to that,
which before the second year of the Exodus had no existence,
the Tabernacle of the congregation.
(152.) Now we see. clearly from these injunctions, that the
general camp, as existing before and from the first, must have
consisted of four particular camps; the component parts of
each of which, in contradistinction to those of any other, are
enumerated, i. Numb. ii. 3-9; x. 14-16, the camp of Judah;
ii. Numb. ii. 10-16 ; x. 18-30, the camp of Reuben ; iii. Numb.
ii. 18-34; X- 22—24, the camp of Ephraim; iv. Numb. ii. 25-
31 ; X. 25-37j> the camp of Dan. And these four camps,
so composed, while making up collectively one great Host,
yet, as made up themselves of three out of the twelve Tribes
respectively, — each of them numerous enough to form an
army by itself, — both Numb. ii. 2, 3, cf. i. 52, and x. 28, are
called Hosts or Armies also.
(153.) If then the general camp of the Israelites from the
time when they began to have a camp, that is, the Exodus,
was made up of four camps, what can be inferred from that
fact, except that even before the Exodus, and preliminary to
it, the entire body of the people must have been divided into
four separate bodies, into four divisions of the twelve Tribes,
each of them a fourth part of the whole respectively ? And if
besides the twelve Tribes, thus divisible into four bodies of
three Tribes each, which must have gone out at the Exodus,
there was also a thirteenth Tribe, not included in them, which
nevertheless went out with them — the Tribe of Levi, — what
must be inferred from that fact too, except that they must
have gone out in five divisions, /oKr of the other Tribes, and a
fifth, of the Tribe of Levi ?
(154.) Now this is confirmed by Exod. xiii. 18; "And the
childi-en of Israel went up harnessed out of the land of Egypt :"
a text which has given so much trouble to commentators, and

104 Historical Character of the PentateiKh. [quest, xiv.
to which Dr. Colenso has devoted the Ninth Chapter of his
Review. That the verb so rendered, with the Masoretic
pimctuation, is liable to be translated by harnessed, and con
sequently with that punctuation is ambiguous, I am ready to
allow ; but that, without this punctuation, there is any ambi
guity in it, I utterly deny. Simply so read without points,
it could be taken for nothing so naturally as the plural of the
Hebrew numeral for five, or the passive participle plural of a
verb made out of that numeral in the sense of to di-vide into,
or to reckon by, fives. And on this construction it could
mean neither more nor less in the Hebrew than what would
be meant in Latin by quintati, or in Greek by ¦nmnx.-nacr^Livoi or
¦7Tfij,-j:aa-6(VT€s, (from TrejtxTrd^o), which is of classical authority,)
or hy fived in English — in all these modes of expressing it,
the thing intended being, that the children of Israel went up
divided into Fives — not five in a rank, as it is rendered in
the margin of the English Bible, but in ¥1ve bodies. And
that this must be the meaning of the term in this instance,
after what has been already collected, from other and inde
pendent data, of the circumstances under which they actually
went out, i. e. divided into four bodies, each of them compre
hending a fourth part of the twelve Tribes, and therefore with
a fifth, made up of the thirteenth, the Tribe of Levi, and ever
after forming a camp of its o-wn*, it appears superfluous to
offer any further proof. And thus this text itself, which has
hitherto been the Cru.r of commentators, comes in critically
just where it is wanted, to confirm our previous inferences
from antecedent probability, and the reason of things, as well
as from the indirect testimony of Scripture, as completely as
can be desired.
* Exod. xii. 38, it is said, " A mixed multitude went up also with them,
(cf. Numb. xi. 4,) besides very much cattle." But that multitude was no
part of the Tribes; and therefore cannot be considered included in the
division of the Children of Israel as such. They would constitute, no
doubt, a division by themselves, and consequently a si.xth division.

quest. XV.] Israelites dwelling in Tents. 105
Question XV. — The Israelites dwelling in Tents.
(Colenso, ch. viii. pp. 45-47.)

Q55.) Again, among the other preparations either for the
life of soldiers in the camp, or for that of sojourners in the
desert, nothing would appear more indispensable, nothing
would sooner be thought of, than the provision of tents.
The difliculties, raised on this point in the Eighth Chapter
of the Pentateuch critically Examined, are utterly imaginary,
except on one supposition, the falseness of which has been
sufliciently exposed already, viz. that this great host of future
soldiers, or this numerous caravan of future wanderers in the
wilderness, had all their preparations, with a view to either of
those contingencies, and this of tents among the rest, to make
in less than twenty-four hours' time, instead of nine months.
(156.) It is not easy to divine from this eighth chapter,
whether in the opinion of the author the truthfulness of Scrip
ture is committed to the fact that the Israelites, during the
whole of this sojourn in the wilderness, dwelt in what the
Hebrew calls aelim, and the EngUsh, tents, or to the fact that,
for the same length of time, they lived under cover of what
the original styles succoth, or saccoth, and the English ver
sion booths. He admits (53), on the testimony of Exod. xvi.
16, that, immediately after the Exodus, the people must have
been li-ving in tents-; and yet he finds in that state of the case
an apparent inconsistency with the inference, liable, as he
supposes, to be drawn from Levit. xxiii. 42, 43, implying
prima facie that, for the whole of the interval between the
Exodus and the settlement in Canaan, they must have been
living in booths, altogether the same in point of construction
as those in which, after their settlement in Canaan, and as a
perpetual memorial of this very fact, they were commanded to
live seven days every year, on the tops of their houses. And
he sees a difficulty in this — as well he may — if the only habi
tations of the entire nation, for the whole period of their
nomadic life, are to be supposed to have been such booths as
those of the feast of Tabernacles, made of the boughs of trees;

106 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch, [quest, xv.
and if in the desert, of such boughs as the sands of Arabia
would have been competent to supply : and not for one year
only, but for forty years.
(157.) It may help to clear up this apparent inconsistency,
to point out to the reader first of all, this distinction, that the
word used in every other allusion to the proper habitations of
the Israelites during this sojourn of theirs in the wildemess,
is aelim; and the word used in this solitary instance of
Lev. xxiii. 42, 43, in explanation of the feast of Tabernacles,
according to the Masoretic punctuation, is succoth, according
to my own mode of reading and pronouncing it, is saccoth.
Secondly, that these terms were so related between them
selves, that aelim, in one point of view, would not be distin
guishable from succoth, and succoth, in another point of view,
would not be distinguishable from aelim.
(158.) For, i. I find from Gesenius that the root of this
noun ael, or aelim,, may be considered a verb, (or a certain
tense of a verb, denoting to change) the proper meaning of
which would be, to change one's jjlaee of abode, to migrate from
place to place. On this principle, the first and proper sense
of the noun substantive derived from it, (compare kWos in
Greek, alius in Latin, else in English,) would be that of a
shifting and migratory, and consequently a temporary, habita
tion. And every one must see that, while such a name might
with the utmost propriety be given to a variable place of
abode, like a tent, the name itself could not have been taken
from the nature of the thing described by it in general, an
habitation or place of abode, under any circumstances, but
from a certain accident of that nature, whereby such a place
of abode as a tent would stand discriminated from all other
habitations in general; viz. that while all other habitations,
once fixed in a particular locality, are ever after stationary
there, the tent is that kind of habitation, which, whereso
ever set up, is never stationary on the same spot, is perpetu
ally changing its place — constantly liable to be taken down
in oue spot, and set up again in another. We see then that,
if there be any other property in which even such an habita
tion as the tent must agree with every other kind and place
of human abode in general, this word uel, so common in the
languages of the east, in its application to the proper dis-

QUEST. XV.] Israelites dwelling in Tents. 107
tinctive habitation of the occupants of the desert, leaves that
entirely out of sight.
(159.) ii. On the contrary, this other term, saccoth or
succoth, I find from Gesenius also, is the feminine plural of a
noun sak, or suk — (compare here too, the Greek (tAkkos, the
Latin saccus, and the EngUsh sack,) — itself directly derived
from a verb, the primary meaning of which is to weave or to
interweave, and the secondary, to cover, to protect. And that
being the case, common sense must draw the same inference
with respect to the meaning of the derivative sak, as Gese
nius, that, as so derived, it must carry with it both the idea
of something artificially put together on the one hand, and
the idea of something, so constructed, intended to cover, to
shelter, to protect, on the other. And what would this be but
the description both of the materials, of which all such abodes
as tents are constructed (skins, either dressed or undressed,
textile fabrics of every kind, and even the branches and leaves
of trees) — and of the manner in which they are constructed —
(as the result of such materials made into one, by interweaving,
by sewing together, or in any other conceivable way) — and of
the use and purpose for which they are intended — to cover, to
shelter their proper inhabitants. And every one must see that
as so derived and so defined the sak must include the ael ; the
sak must be the generic, the ael the specific, idea of its proper
kind. (160.) It is no wonder consequently that this term succoth,
or saccoth, is actually used in other places of Scripture^, in a
sense equivalent to aelim, and not as Dr. Colenso insinuates
(53) improperly, but with the utmost propriety. It must be
evident in short that, for the idea of such a place of human
habitation, and so constructed, as a tent, the most proper
term ofthese two, sak and ael, is sak ; and it is far from im
probable that sak, not ael, was the term first used for that
idea. It is certain at least that the only two instances of its
use in the Pentateuch, besides Lev. xxiii. 43, 43, (Gen. xxxiii.
z 2 Sam. xi. 11: xxii. 12: Ps. xviii. 1 1 ; Job xxxvi. 29 : Jonah iv. 5 : Amos
ix. II : V. 26. In this last instance succoth is evidently used in the sense of
aK.-i]v'i\, or a tent. Cf. Acts vii. 43, where it is rendered by aK-r\vi\. The o' render
both ael and succoth alike by aK-i\iri] or aK-i\vai. So does Josephus. The feast
of Tabernacles, the feast of Booths, (succoth in the Hebrew,) is always the feast
of the SKTivoirri-yia in Greek.

108 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest. XV.
17, Exod. xii. 37, xiii. 30, Numb, xxxin. 5, 6,) are of the
highest antiquity in the history of the Hebrew language —
the former, contemporary with the return of Jacob from
Padan-aram, B.C. 1810, the latter, with the Exodus, and the
first day's march from Rameses to Succoth, April 10, B.C.
1560. The erection of these booths of Jacob, on that spot,
seems to have given its name to that locality ever after ; and
very possibly because, though made of the usual materials of
simply temporary abodes, they were intended and applied in
this instance for more than a passing occupation. On the
second occasion too, the coincidence of the first day's halt of
the Israelites with this particular locality, and the necessity
thereby imposed upon them of spreading the tents, with
which they had provided themselves before their departure,
for the first time, on this spot, and the striking spectacle con-
sequenth' there exhibited, of upwards of 216,000 tents so set
up for the night, might have given, and very probably did
give, its name of Saccoth or Succoth to this first encampment.
(161.) It is very conceivable therefore, that the oldest
name for a tent in the Hebrew language was that of sak, or
suk, not ael ; and that the use of the term ael, for the same
idea, grew up by degrees out of the life, led by the people for
forty years in the desert, whereby no two ideas could become
more regularly associated in their minds, than that of a sak,
and that of a constantly shifting and changing place of abode,
that is, a tent. I have no doubt at least, that Succoth was
purposely used Lev. xxiii. 42, 43, as the better adapted of the
two to explain and account for the injunction prescribed at the
same time, as the practical illustration of its meaning- : " Ye
shall dwell in Saccoth, (i. e. in places of abode, places of cover
ing and shelter, artificially constructed for a temporary use
and occupation,) seven days in every year, as a memorial for
ever that I made your fathers, after thej^ came out of Egjqit,
dwell in such Saccoth (places of abode, places of covering and
shelter, artificially constructed for a temporary occupation)
for forty years in the wilderness."

QUEST. X-VI.] Israelites armed. 109
Question XVI. — The Israelites armed.
(Colenso, ch. ix. pp. 48-53.)

(162.) Another obvious want ofthe Israelites, which would
require to be suppUed, and if possible by themselves, before
their departure, would be that of arms. That they were pro
vided with arms before the Exodus, or that they went out
armed, does not indeed appear from any testimony but that
of Exod. xiii. 18, just considered, construed as it has generally
been : but from the mere silence of Scripture there would be
no more reason a priori to infer that they had not arms, than
that they had. And perhaps, if the necessity of the case
required it, something might be said calculated to render it
a priori as probable that they had arms, as that they had not.
For instance, it might be argued that, although while the
Egyptians were treating the Israelites as slaves, and en
deavouring to keep down their numbers, and to break their
spirit, in every way, it must have been an obvious precaution
to begin with disarming them, and ever after to deny them
the possession of the means of self-defence ; yet as soon as it
began to be apparent even to themselves, that the Israelites
could no longer be detained in their sei-vice, that the time
would soon arrive when they must part with them for ever, it
would be difficult to say what motive even they could have
had for withholding arms fi-om them any longer, even if they
had done so until then.
(163.) Notwithstanding however what might thus be
urged on grounds of antecedent probability to the contrary,
I am clearly of opinion that, as a body at least, whatsoever
might be the case with individuals among them, the Israel
ites, up to the actual day of their departure, were still unpro
vided with arms. In my opinion, the description of the dress,
and the attitude, (Exod. xii. 11, Deut. xvi. 3,) in which they
were commanded to eat the Passover, and to wait for the
summons, announcing the moment of their departure, is
decisive on that question ; for that was clearly the attire and

110 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, x^^.
attitude of travellers expecting to set out on a journey,
not that of soldiers waiting for the signal to begin their
march. And yet, we may stUl be permitted to believe it
was always the intention of the Divine Providence, when
thus leading forth its own armies out of Egypt to its
own Wars, and to the execution of its own purposes of
judgment on the nations of Canaan, not to leave them
long destitute of the most indispensable of all requisites
for their duty and services as soldiers, and nevertheless to
supply this want in their behalf in a way much more worthy
of itself, than if it had permitted them to arm themselves,
whether with or -without the consent of their masters, the
Egyptians. In a word, we may still believe -with Ezechiel
Tragicusa, and with Josephus b, and very probably -with the
whole tenor of Jewish tradition from the first, that it was
always the intention of their Divine Leader, to provide his
own followers with arms, out of the spoils of the Egyptians,
who had so long denied them all the means of self-defence.
We may still believe that one of the ends and purposes con
templated by " hardening the heart of Pharaoh, and the heart
of his people," to the pursuit of those " whom they had
themselves entreated to be gone," in the vain hope of com
pelling them by force to return, was the destruction of the
Egyptians in the Red Sea, and the application of the arms,
offensive and defensive, -with which they were equipped, to
the use of the Israelites. Let us therefore proceed to inquire
in what manner the destruction in question was calculated to
answer that purpose; and with that view institute a brief
survey of the course and succession of events, according to
the Scripture account, from the Exodus to the passage of the
Red Sea.
(164.) I begin with assuming that the Land of Goshen, the
appointed abode of the children of Israel in Egypt from the
first '^, was the regicm of Lower Egypt, situated east of the
Pelusiac branch of the Nile, between Heliopolis and the He-
roopolitan Gulf''. This region, which Scripture calls Goshen,
the o' call Teo-^/ix, and Artapanus (apud Euseb. '=) calls Kaio-di'.
a Apud Euseb. Prsep. Evang. ix. 29. 423. 16. b Ant. Jud. ii. xvi. 6.
« Gen. xlv. 10, xlvi. 28, 29. 34, xlvii. i. 4. 6. 27, 1. 8 : Exod. viii. 22, ix. 26 :
(cf Josh. X. 41, xi. 16, XV. 51.) ^ Cf. Gesenius in voce. e Prsepa-
ratio, ix. 23. 391. 3.

QtFEST. x\a.] Israelites armed. Ill
Its name in the o is so like the Hebrew for rain, as almost to
authorize the inference that it must have been so called, be
cause in that quarter of Egypt, besides the irrigation, there was
rain ; and as a natural consequence of both, a constant supply
of pasturage for flocks and herds — for that Goshen was a
land of pastures, appears from the texts just referred to.
(165.) I take it for granted also that the principal city of
Egypt, and the residence of the kings of Egypt, not only
before and at the Descent, but still, aU the time of these pro
ceedings preliminary to the Exodus, was On or Heliopolis'' :
and that whensoever, in the course of these proceedings, the
city as such is alluded to, (as at Exod. ix. 29. 33,) this city
of On is meant. Memphis? was not yet in being. Thebes
was probably in existence ; but nothing so considerable as
yet, as it afterwards became''. And as, even when both
Thebes and Memphis were now in being. On was still classed
with them as one of the three oldest and most influential
cities in aU Egypt — and as, even when the palm of antiquity
was awarded by some to Thebes, and by some to Memphis,
the second place in that respect by common consent was
assigned to On' — that, in the opinion of all impartial judges,
ought to be the best proof which could be desired, that On
was in reality the oldest of all. Moses himself, according to
Manetho'^, was a native of On ; and, according to the tradi
tion ofthe Heliopolitans', the king, in whose time the Exodus
took place, and who went out in pursuit of the Israelites, and
perished with his army in the Red Sea, set out from Helio
polis or On. It is manifest therefore, that as the proceedings,
preliminary to the Exodus, began and were carried on in the
land of Goshen, on the one hand, yet at On, or in the neigh
bourhood of On, on the other, Goshen must have included
On, or On must have been contiguous to Goshen.
(166.) Now it is observable that. Gen. xlvu. 11, the land
of Goshen is called the land of Rameses ; and Exod. xii. 37,
Numb, xxxiii. 3. 5, when the people set out at last, they set
out from Rameses. It is observable also that, Exod. i. 1 1,

f Fasti CathoUci, iv. 448 n. e Ibid. 438-448 : Three Witnesses, 160.
fc Fasti Catholici, iv. 248. * Ibid. 45° «• ^ ^pud Joseph, contra
ApoU. i. 26. 28, cf. ii. 2. 1 Artapanus, apud Euseb. Praep. Evang. ix. 27.
403- 3S-.S7-

113 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch, [quest, xvi.
Pithom and Raamses or Rameses are mentioned as the names of
two cities, called treasure-cities, which the Israelites are said
to have built for the Egyptians. We observe however that
they are mentioned in such an order that, if both were not
built at once, Pithom was probably first built, and then
Rameses. (167.) Now with respect to one of these two, Pithom, both
the city so called, and its name, appear to have gone down to
posterity. The learned at least are agreed that the Pithom of
the Exodus was very probably the Y\6.tov)j,os of later times, in
the Heroopolite Nome, according to D'An-viUe, aUuded to by
Herodotus'", and mentioned by Stephanus". And YlaTovjxos,
as an Egyptian word, resolvable into the article Ila and
Tovixos, being explained" to have meant a narroio place, sur
rounded by mountains, the name itself, so interpreted, is a
voucher for the reality of the city so situated, and of the pur
pose to which it was applied — a treasure-city, buUt from
choice in a narrow place, surrounded by mountauis, and
therefore so much the more easy to be defended.
(168.) Of Raamses or Rameses, (which I assume to have
been only accidentaUy different, and which in fact are both the
same in the Hebrew -without points,) no memorial seems to
have descended to posterity : none at least is discoverable in
later times. Rameses indeed is a name of frequent occurrence
in the Monumental and Dynastic history of the Egyptians ;
and the greatest of their Monumental kings themselves is
supposed to have borne that name. But the Monumental
and Dynastic liistory with me passes for nothing? ; though I
see no reason why even its testimony should not be considered
competent to bear -witness to the simple fact of the existence
of a proper name of this kind, of the highest antiquity, among
the Egyptians. As to the meaning of the name, (though some
have explained it to denote " the son of the sun,"j I am not
aware that any thing satisfactory has yet been proposed. The
first of its elements seems to be the same which with the
article Phe or Pha enters the name of Pharaoh — or The Klngi.
(169.) From this distinction in the subsequent history of
these two cities, we may probably infer that, while the city
"^ ii. 158. " In voce. ° Gesenius, in voce. P See
my Three Witnesses, 160 sqq. Q Fasti CathoUci, iv. 446 and )i.

QUEST. XVI,] Israelites armed. 113
of Pithom had been built some time before the Exodus, the
city of Rameses was still in the act of being built when the
proceedings before the Exodus began, and was still unfinished
at the Exodus itself If so, it is an obvious inference from
this fact that, long before those proceedings began, this work
of building the second of these treasure-cities having been
begun — long before the same time too, all the male and
adult population of the Israelites must have been already
assembled in that locality, to take their respective parts in
this task. And if the whole of the male population, the whole
of the female too ; and consequently their famiUes with them,
and very probably also their fiocks and herds. And they must
have been still assembled in the same quarter, and stiU labour
ing in common on the same ser-vice, when Moses and Aaron
appeared among them.
(170.) It foUows that, being all assembled here, with their
wives and children and possessions, before these proceedings
began, they must have continued assembled there, while they
were still going on. And here they would probably be
living, promiscuously with native Egyptians, in houses or
dweUings of their own, such as are alluded to Exod. xii. 19.
22, 23, long before the appearance of Moses and Aaron ; and
would continue to be living up to the eve of their departure,
Exod. xii. 23, 33. And here too, as living in innumerable
instances either in the same houses as the native Egyptians,
or in neighbouring ones, they would be placed in such cir
cumstances as to be capable of rendering a literal obedience
to the injunction at Exod. iii. 31, 33, xi. 3, to ask of the na
tive Egyptians, (the inmates of their houses, or their neigh
bours,) agreeably to the customs of the east, whatsoever they
would, before their departure from among them. And Rame
ses itself being situated in the land of Goshen, and yet being
also the sole residence of the people of Israel all the time that
these proceedings, before the Exodus, were going on, it is no
wonder that. Gen. xl-vii. 11, the land of Goshen itself, as
comprehending this, the most remarkable locality both in
the history of the Israelites and in that of the Egyptians,
should be caUed the land of Rameses.
(171.) After these explanations it will now appear to be
only matter of course that, when the Israelites set out at last,
I

114 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch, [quest, xvi.
it should be said, both Exod. xn. 37 and Numb, xxxiii. 3, 5,
that they set out from Rameses. And the date of this de
parture being assumed as April 10 at midnight, or soon after,
B. C. 1560, which that year was th.e feria quimta, let us foUow
their march from this locaUty to the quarter where they crossed
the Red Sea*.
(172.) The first day's march, Exod. xii. 37, Numb, xxxiii.
5, was from Rameses to Succoth ; and the time of the arrival
at Succoth being assumed as Pitching time would be an hour
before sunset at least, April 10 also ; and I have already ex
plained (160) that this first pitching of the camp of the
Israelites for the night in this locality, and the first consequent
spreading of the almost innumerable array of Succoth or Tents,
necessary to accommodate so large an host, and the striking
spectacle thereby exhibited for the first time, very probably
gave it the name, which it appears to have borne ever after.
(173.) The next day's march being assumed to have begun
from Succoth, about an hour before sunrise, AprU 11, thelma
* We cannot indeed do this with absolute certainty, not knowing either
the exact site of Rameses, from which they set out, or the rate of their
day's march. It may be assumed, however, that, under ordinary circum
stances, they would begin their march, every day, an hour before sunrise,
and continue to march until an hour before sunset — with some interval
probably of rest between, which would vary, according to circumstances.
At this period of the year (the vernal equinox) they would be marching on
this assumption, from five a.m., or a little earlier, to five p.m., — twelve
hours of mean solar, or kairic, time, — divided probably between ten hours of
motion, and two of rest. And the rate of their march being supposed two
Roman miles an hour, ten hours' march would be twenty Roman, ^sixteen
English, miles. The best authenticated of these first three stations,
Succoth, Etham, and Pi-hahiroth, is the last, from its position relatively to
the Clysma. If we measure twenty Roman miles from the north cape of
the Clysma, due north, it brings us to a little beyond the site of the
Arsinoe or Cleopatra of later times, as the probable site of Etham ; and if
we measure twenty miles more due north-west, from this site, it will
probably bring us to that of Succoth ; and twenty miles more, in the same
direction, it might be supposed, should bring us to Rameses. It should
be remembered, however, that the first day's march, which began so soon
after midnight, would probably be much longer than either of the two
following days' marches ; and that, to recover the site of Rameses under
such circumstances from that of Succoth, we should have to go back thirty
miles, more probably than twenty; and that would bring us very nearly to
the site of the ancient On or Heliopolis.

quest. XVI.] Israelites armed. 115
sexta, was terminated for the day, Exod. xiii. 20, Numb.
xxxiii. 6, by the arrival at Etham, about pitching time, as we
may presume, and an hour before sunset, in this instance
also. The designation of this locality, Etham, on the edge of
the -wilderness, points to the boundary Une which separated
the inhabited from the uninhabited part of the country; i.e.
the land of Egypt, and especially that part of it called the land
of Goshen, on the west and south, from the desert of Arabia
Petrsea to the N. E. Another name of this desert of Etham
must have been that of the wilderness of Shur also r, some
times described as lying lefore, i. e. in front of Egypt. There
cannot be much uncertainty in assuming this edge of the
wilderness as the boundary line, drawn on the maps from the
northem extremity of the Sinus Heroopolites to Rhinocorura
or Rhaphia, on the way from Egypt to Palestine, to the
N. E. ; and the site of Etham itself, on the very edge of the
-wUderness, as very probably near to that of the Arsinoe or
Cleopatra of the Ptolemaic sera, the northern extremity of the
Sinus Heroopolites, or Gulf of Suez, itself.
(174.) And here, after passing the night of the Julian
AprU II, and the evening of thelma septima, according to
the primitive reckomng, on the morning of April 12, the
morning of the/ena septima, instead of continuing their route
into the wUderness straight before them, N. E. or E., they
received the command of God, Exod. xiv. 3, Numb, xxxiii. 7,
to turn, and march due south, with the coast of the Red Sea
on their left, until they should come to a locality called
Pi-hahiroth, and circumstantially described as lying between
one locality called Migdol, and another, on the sea, called
Baal-zephon. (175.) Now with respect to these names, and the places so
caUed, there is in all the maps of Egypt, at the distance of a
moderate day's journey southward from the head of the Gulf
of Suez, a remarkable double range of mountains, opposite to
each other, one on the north and the other on the south,
running paraUel, from as far back as the site of the ancient
Memphis, as low down as the coast of the Red Sea, on the east,
or south-east, yet not terminating at the sea itself, but in a
strip of land, of a certain breadth, between these mountains
- Exod. XV. 22 ; Numb, xxxiii. 8 ; cf Gen. xxv. 18; xvi. 7 ; i Sam, xv. 7.
1 3

116 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xvi.
and the sea. According to Bruce^, one of these mountains
(that on the south) is caUed at present Gewoube, the other, on
the north, is caUed Jibbel Attakah, and the vaUey between them
the vaUey of Badeah—und both open into the low and flaf
stripe of land, which runs north and south between them and
the sea.
(] 76.) Most of the commentators on the Scripture account
of the Exodus have seen reason to conclude that they find the
Pi-hahiroth of the Exodus in this quarter, in the opening be
tween these two mountain ridges, still in existence; and this
conclusion is strongly confirmed by the meaning of this name
of Pi-hahii-oth itself, treated as an Hebrew term, and not as
an ancient Egyptian one ; for as so explained, according to
Gesenius, it means the Mouth of Caverns — a name very
Ukely a priori to have been given to the entrance of a valley,
fianked by two high mountain ridges, which might almost
have met midway over it, and so presented the appearance
externally of a continuous chasm or cavern*. It is con
firmed also by the coincidence that, opposite to the northem
ridge, Jibbel Attakah, there is still a cape, or headland,
on the sea, very well adapted for the site of a watchtower,
a lighthouse, an observatory of any kind — the name of
which, according to the idiom of the Hebrew language,
might stiU, -with the utmost propriety, from this property of
its situation, be called Baal-Tsephon, the Master of Observa
tion, the Lord of the Observatory*. It is confirmed also, and
perhaps most strongly of all, by the coincidence that, in all
the maps of Egypt too, the arm of the sea, just opposite the
* Treated however as an Egyptian term, this word, Pi-hahiroth, accord
ing to Gesenius, denoted, " a place adorned with green grass," and that
would probably suit even better than the other to the circumstances of the
case. The valley of Badeah betvveen the two mountain ridges in question,
having the benefit of the waters which fell from these two ridges,
was probably a fertile spot, and covered with verdure ; and that might
have given its name to the whole valley, as that of Pi-hahiroth, the place
of green grass or verdure. It would account also for the selection of this
spot as the halting-place of the Israelites, after the third day's march ; for
the sake of their cattle at least, which might have found pasture there in
abundance. • Travels, (DubUn, 1790, 8vo.) i. 240. t Cf. Gesenius iu voce, also
in Tsaphe.

QUEST, xvi.] Israelites armed. 117
gorge of the mountain-pass in question, is laid down under the
name of the Clysma, i.e. the KAi;o-jua, or KaraKAvo-juos, the Flood
or Overwhelming — as if tradition i^ had always handed it down
that some time or other, and in this part of the sea, something
had once been overwhelmed by a great overflow of the waters
of the sea, as the Egyptians must have been with all their
army at the Exodus. And it is quite in unison with such a
tradition that the natives, according to Bruce 'f, still call this
part ofthe sea Bahur Kolzum, or the Sea qf Destruction ; and
that the cape just opposite to Pi-hahiroth, (the site of the
Baal-zephon of the Exodus,) is still called Ras Musa, or the
Cape of Mews. And it conflrms these local traditions on the
western or Egyptian side of this arm of the sea, that the Red
Sea being supposed to have been crossed here, three days'
joumey from the coast on the opposite side, due east, into the
wilderness, brings the traveller at present to the springs of
Korondel, the waters of which are brackish and bitter at
present, as three days' march into the desert before them,
from the quarter where they crossed the sea, brought the
Israelites to Marah, the waters of which were bitter at that
time too. And the springs of Korondel, according to the
local tradition", are the springs of Marah.
(177.) I will assume then that this Clysma of the Red Sea
was the locaUty of the passage of the Exodus. According to
Bruce y, the breadth of the sea in this quarter is somewhat less
than /o if-;- leagues, which would be equivalent to iwelve^ng\,is\i
miles. But this is only a conjectural estimate. According
to D'Anville, it could have been scarcely so much as ten
Roman miles, equal to eight English ; but at that, I will take
the liberty of assuming it. The O25posite coast, according to
Bruce y, is low and sandy at present, and very easj^ for landing
upon. The depth of the sea in mid channel is about fourteen
fathoms, (eighty-four feet,) and near the sides, or by the coast,
about nine fathoms, or fifty-four feet.
(178.) Let us now then proceed to consider the circum
stances of the passage itself, — premising only that, as it was
made in the night, — (after sunset at least, only seven or eight
days after the equinox of spring, when the sun would set
a F.asti CathoUci, i. 334. ^ i. 243- '' 'hid. 244.

118 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xvi.
within a quarter of an hour after six p.m.,) and as the moon
also was new April 9, about six a.m., only three or four days
previouslya,-the night ofthe passage, April 13 from sunset, to
April 13 at sunrise, under ordinary circumstances could have
had no light of any kind.
i. The first observation which requires to be made on the
Scriptural account of these proceedings is. That, as the people
had made a regular day's journey from Etham to this locaUty,
and on their arrival here were directed to encamp at the mouth
ofthe Pi-hahiroth, as if for the night, it may be presumed that
the time of their arrival was much about the usual time of
halting and pitching, in these journies or marches of theirs, i. e.
about one hour before sunset.
ii. The next is. That some time probably after this halt,
but before they could yet have had time to encamp in a
regular manner for the night, the Egyptians also must have
come in sight, (Exod. xiv. 9, 10, 13,) for whose appearance
at this critical moment it would not be difficult to account,
by supposing them to have set out in pursuit of the Israelites,
the day after their departure, April 11, and by means of
forced marches, and by taking the hypothenuse of the triangle
of which the Israelites had described the two sides, (which
would probably, for a part of the way at least, be through the
valley of Badeah, between the two ridges above mentioned — )
to have reached the same spot in two days, and one night,
which it had taken the Israelites three days and two nights to
reach*. iii. The Israelites, in consequence of this sudden appear
ance of their enemies behind them, having been commanded
to go forward, Exod. xiv. 15-22, and Moses, at the same
time, to " stretch out his hand over the sea," (which was
simply the preliminary to its being divided,) the precise
* There is no difficulty with respect to the collection of the army of the
Egyptians for this pursuit, whether the military castes of the Egj-ptians
were in existence at this time, as in subsequent times, or not. Nothing is
more probable than that all Pharaoh's military strength would be as
sembled in the vicinity of On, either for the whole of the year which pre
ceded the Exodus, or for the greater part of it ; though nothing is said in
Scripture about that fact.
a Three Witnesses, 841 and 260 note R.

QUEST. XVI.] Israelites armed. 119
time when it was so divided, and the bottom was laid bare;
it may be presumed must have been that of this command
and this act, Exod. xiv. 16; and consequently that too of
the setting in ofthe strong east wind, ver. 31 — not designed
to cooperate with the power of God Almighty in the pro
duction of the opening, but simply as the instrumental
means of drying and hardening the bottom so laid bare —
for the Israelites the better to pass over it. It is scarcely
necessary to observe on this eeconomy, that, as the Red Sea
itself in this quarter lay almost due north and south, an east
wind in that quarter must blow right across it.
iv. The precise time when the Israelites thus entered the
sea, being intimated xiv. 15-33, — from the fact next men
tioned (vers. 19, 30) that, simultaneously with this movement
in advance, the Angel of God in the pillar of the cloud, who
was going before in front of the people, removed and went
behind them, between them and the Egyptians, — and from
that time forward the pillar was a cloud and darkness to their
pursuers, (cf. Joshua xxiv. 7,) while it ^ave light by night to
the people — and from the effect declared to have ensued on
this distinction, that the one came not near the other all the
night, I think we are justified in inferring that the time
when they entered the sea must have been as nearly as pos
sible the beginning of night as such, and the time taken up
by the passage must have been the whole of the night as
such*. And the whole of the night as such being neither
more nor less at all times, than the natural interval between
the end of twilight after sunset, and the beginning of twilight
before sunrise, at this season of the year, only seven or eight
days later than the equinox, the length of the night as such
* And this inference from Exod. xiv. 15-22, appears to me to be
strongly confirmed by the language of Moses to the people, xiv. 13,
when the Egyptians first came in sight : " For the Egyptians, whom ye
have seen to-day, ye shall see them again no more for ever." If they first
appeared only just before the close of daylight — and under the circum
stances of the case could not be seen again during any part of the night as
such, and by the return of daylight the next morning should themselves
have perished, it might well be said of them, That though they had seen
them once, alive and pursuing, that day, (the day just begun at sunset by
the primitive reckoning,) they should see them again alive no more for
ever.

120 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xvi.
would be the interval between April 13 about 7.30 p.m. on
the one hand, and April 13 about 4.30 a.m. on the other, —
nine hours of mean time, and, at this season of the year, of
kairic time, alike.
V. The next question then is that of the probable rate of
the march across the sea, or the time which would be taken
up by it. And here it is to be observed that, as the people
had already made a good day's march, for an army composed
like theirs, before they were directed to encamp at Pi-hahiroth,
and so soon after* they had received that order were com
manded to go forward still, though, it may well be presumed
that God, who imposed this duty upon them of a march
through the night, following on one through the day, would
himself take care that neither hunger or thirst, nor the
fatigue of travel, should interfere with the execution of his
own commands; we may reasonably presume also that this
night-march, following with so little delay on the march by
day, would be proportionately slow, and could not be assumed
at more than one of our miles an hour.
vi. On this supposition, the breadth of the Clysma being
eight miles, the length of the march across it, both to those
who entered it first and to those who entered it last, would be
eight hours : and if the whole night, as we have concluded,
was occupied by the passage, and the length of the night
as such was nine hours, from 7.30 p.m. to 4.30 a.m., it is easy
to see that, on this principle, the head of the marching column
or columns ofthe Israelites must have entered the sea at 7.30
P.M., the beginning of night, and landed on the opposite side, at
3.30 A.M., an hour before the end of night, — and the rear must
have entered the sea an hour after the beginning of night,
8.30 P.M., and landed on the other side, at the end of night,
4.30 A.M. And between the head and the rear of this column
or these columns, there must have been an interval, equal to
one mile's distance in space, and to one hour's march in
time. vii. And this may lead to the discovery of the marching
* When I say so soon after, I would still wish it to be understood that
there might have been an interval, devoted to rest and refreshment, both
of the people and of their cattle, of tvvo or three hours' duration, at least,
before they resumed their march.

QUEST. XVI.] Israelites armed. 121
order of the Israelites, not only on this occasion, but from the
first ; viz. an order of such a kind that, between the van and
the rear of the marching column, there must have been a
mile of space in depth; and a mile being equivalent to 1760
yards, if there was only one yard's interval in a straight line,
between man and man, (and Vegetiusti allows no more to the
Roman soldiers,) whatsoever the breadth of the marching
column in rank, as it is called, in file it must have been
1760 men.
-viii. Now the Israelites, as we have seen, (149, 150,) having
been formed fi-om the first into four divisions, each of them
comprehending a fourth part of the Twelve Tribes, distinct
from that of Levi — the entire population of these Twelve
Tribes, male and female, adult and non-adult, as we have
also seen (95), having been 1,396,193 souls, a fourth part
of this number would be 324,048 or 324,000; and 324,000,
formed into a marching column of 1760, a yard asunder in
file, would require a front as nearly as possible of 1 84, a yard
asunder in rank. There would be four columns of this mag
nitude, and so distributed, from the first, in the Twelve Tribes.
There would be a fifth, not included in any of these, for the
Tribe of Levi- — the numbers of which, male and female, adult
and non-adult. Numb. iU. 15. 39, ha-ving been 23,000 x 3, or
44,000 at least — they were considerable enough in them
selves, though much less than each of the other divisions,
to have constituted a camp of their own, and a marching
column of their own, from the first — and a camp of that kind,
after the analogy of the other four, probably so formed as to
present the appearance of a column 100 yards in breadth, and
440 yards (the fourth part of a mUe) in depth — the place
of which too, from the first, and ever after, on the march.
Numb. u. 5-17, X. 17,-21, may be assumed to have been the
middle of the other four, between the second of that number,
and the third. And besides these, we have still the mixed
multitude, and the fiocks and herds which accompanied them,
to take into account; and both these together could hardly
have required or taken up less room than a fourth part of the
Twelve Tribes. So that on the whole the marching order of
the Israelites, from the first, must have been that of six
l> iii. 15.

122 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xvi.
columns, — five of the Tribes, and one of the mixed multitude,
and the cattle, — very nearly of equal size.
ix. And ifthis was the order in which they set out at first —
it may be presumed it must have been that in which they
arrived at Pi-hahiroth, on the third day's march, and in which
they entered the sea at last. And this leads at once to the
question. To what extent the sea would require to be opened,
to admit six such bodies as these ? That it could not be less,
under such circumstances, than six times 184 yards, is self-
evident; but, unless these six bodies are supposed to have
been aU formed for the passage into one dense and serried
mass — not much short of a mUe square every way — if there
was only to be some space between column and column, large
enough to prevent the movements of one from interfering with
those of another — ^it is equally e-vident it must have been
much more. Let us then suppose the least interval of this kind
between each of them, which could be considered competent to
ensure the end intended by it ; viz. fifty yards ; — and let us
suppose also that, as the first and the last of these columns
had the waters, one on their right hand, the other on their
left, Exod. xiv. 33. 39, xv. 8, each of these two was separated
from the waters near to it, by a similar space. With these
data, we may calculate the extent to which the sea would
require to be laid open as foUows :

Marching order of the Israelites, at the passage qf the Red Sea.

i Waters on the right hand, and column i.
ii Column i. and column ii. (184 + 50) =
iii Column ii. and column iii.
iv Column iii. and column iv.
v Column iv. and column v.
vi Column v. and column vi.
vii Column vi. and waters on the left hand
Total breadth of columns of march

SO yards.
234 —
234 —
150 —
234 —
234 —
234 —
1370

Fifty yards more than three quarters of an English mile,
1,330 yards. Nor should any one be startled even at such a
conclusion as this. For, if the sea must be laid bare at all.

QUEST. XVI.] Israelites armed. 123
Omnipotence being the agent of the required effect, it is the
same thing to suppose it laid open to the extent of a mUe, as
to that of an hair's breadth. If we admit of a miracle at all
— aU miracles, whether greater or less to human apprehension,
being the same thing to Almighty power, all we have to con
sider in a given instance of the exertion of that power, is
what the circumstances of the case must have required, not
how it was to be brought to pass. It is far from improbable,
in my opinion, that even the above computation is in defect,
rather than in excess, of the truth.
X. To resume then the thread of our reasoning ; I cannot
help thinking that the time when the last man in these
marching columns of the people must have quitted the sea
and stepped on terra firma, is intimated Exod. xiv. 34 : " It
came to pass, that in the morning watch the Loed looked
unto the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and
of the cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians, ver. 35,
And took off their chariot wheels, that they drave them
heavily." For the morning watch would begin at 3 a. m.
April 13 ; and 4.30 a.m., the time at which, as we have calcu
lated, those who entered the sea at 8.30 p.m. the evening be
fore, would land on the opposite shore the next morning,
would be exactly the middle of the morning watch — and the
object of that looking unto the host of the Egyptians, as de
clared by the effect which followed upon it, having evidently
been to retard their march, between this time and the time
preordained for their destruction — that too is explained by
the fact that 4.30 a.m. that morning it was still night, though
the day might be ready to break; and yet, if this great
work of the Lord's on his own enemies was not to be done in
the dark, but openly and before the eyes of his own people, it
must stiU be delayed somewhat longer. The probable time
then when the rod of Moses was again, by command of the
Deity, stretched over the bed of the sea, followed by the
return of the sea to its strength, was about 5.15 a. m. or, as
the Scripture itself expresses it, Exod. xiv. 36, 37, " When
the morning appeared" — half an hour before sunrise itself,
5.45 A.M.
(179.) Let us then in the last place consider the circum
stances of both these acts, as alike concerned in the mii-acu-

124 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, x-vi.
lous effect ; — both the aet of restraining for a time, and the
act of restoring again, this strength of the sea. By the former,
the bed of the sea laid bare eight miles in breadth, three
quarters of a mile in length — the waters on either side pUed
up, off the coast, to an height of much more than fifty-four
feet, and in the middle to an height of much more than
eighty-four feet — and this mass of waters, rigid and stiff
under the restraining power, resembling nothing so much as
a solid wall of ice, Exod. xiv. 22. 29, xv. 8, on the right
hand of the Israelites and on the left. By the latter, both
these walls of ice suddenly melted — instantaneously restored
to their natural fiuidity, let loose, both at once, in a moment,
to rush together again and mingle and coalesce as before,
with all the rapidity, all the power and might, of the watery
element held so long- in a state so contrary to its own nature,
and suddenly released from it. What, we may ask, in such a
commotion and such a collision of the watery element as this,
not, could have lived, until equilibrium and tranquillity was
restored, but could have sunk ? What substance, however
much hea-vier than water, exposed to the action of two torrents
like these, rushing together from opposite sides, could have
sunk to the bottom in such a maelstrom as this — while it
lasted? What wonder then, that the dead bodies of the
Egyptians should have been cast by myriads on the opposite
shore, Exod. xiv. 30 : cf. Ps. cvi. 11 — especially if we take
into account what is implied in Exod. xv. 10, the setting in
of another great wind, which must have been a west wind,
along with the melting of the waters, the final end of which
could have been nothing so probably as this di-iving of the
drowned bodies of the Egyptians in crowds upon the eastern
shore *. And if the bodies of the EgyiDtians were thus liable
to be washed ashore, by the mere action of these waters and
this wind, so would the armour upon them, including their
swords and their shields, both which, while they were still
marching, would be carried attached to their persons ; and so,
a fortiori, would the Ughter and unattached parts of their
* Compare also Ps. Ixxvii. 16-18 — which probably refers to this same
occasion, and specifies some more of the remarkable phenomena of the
time, rain from heaven, thunder, hghtnings, and an earthquake.

•^UEST. XVII.] Camp, and Necessities of the People. 125
equipments — their spears, their bows, and their arrows, and
the like — be.
(180.) It is easy then to see that under such circumstances
as these, the miracle of this day, April 12-13, ^-^- 1560,
could not fail, as one of its natural and necessary conse
quences, to supply the want of every description of arms,
whether for defence or for offence, under which the Israelites
might have been previously labouring — as far at least as the
army of the Egyptians was competent to furnish them. Nor
do we require any other explanation, but the known interven
tion of this miracle, to reconcile together two seemingly in
consistent facts — one, that before the passage of the Red Sea,
the Israelites must have been without arms, the other, that
directly after, when they were attacked by the Amalekites,
they must have been possessed of arms.

Question XVII. — The Extent of the Camp, and the daily
Necessities of ihe People.
(Colenso, ch. vi. pp. 38-40.)
(181.) The subject of this chapter of Dr. Colenso's, so far
as concemed the duties of the Priests, in certain instances,
involving the question of the relative position of the Taber
nacle and the camp, was considered supra (35 sqq.). I revert
to it here, for the sake of the further question, (reserved at
that time (38) for future consideration,) of the size or extent
ofthe camp — from which, and a mistaken apprehension ofthe
site of the Tabernacle relatively to the general encampment,
and a mistaken construction of Deuteronomy, xxui. 9-14, Dr.
Colenso has drawn the inference (45) that it was incumbent
on the 23,000 Levites only, to say nothing of the rest of the
people, to walk every day a distance of six mUes, even for the
daily necessities of human nature, even ad alvum levandam.
(182.) Knowing as we now do the probable amount of the
entire population of the Israelites at the Exodus, we are in a
better condition than we should have been without that know
ledge, to form an idea of the size of the camp which must

126 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch, [quest, xvii.
have been wanted to contain, and to accommodate, all of it.
It is to be observed however first. That, as to the site of this
camp relatively to the Tabernacle, or vice versa, it has been
seen (40 sqq.) that the Tabernacle was never, as Dr. Colenso
supposed, and as the drift of his reasoning required him to
suppose, erected in the midst of the stationary encampment of
the people — but that, s\,s often as both the Tabemacle and the
camp were pitched for any length of time, the Tabemacle
itself was set up at a certain distance from the camp. Se
condly, as to this distance, it has also been shewn (43) that,
after the Tabernacle had once been erected, often as, in
the account of subsequent proceedings, mention occurs of
the congregation's being called together to the door of the
Tabernacle, nothing is meant except that they were sum
moned to the gate of the court of the Tabemacle, a spacious
entrance, laid open on such occasions, and commanding from
without a full -view of the Tabernacle in front, and of every
thing going on -within the court — and therefore there must
always have been a vacant space between the court of the
Tabernacle and the camp — purposely left for the assembUng
of the congregation upon it, on such occasions, and answering
under the Tabernacle both to the men's and the women's court
under the Temple. (See 33, 33, 34 sqq.)
(188.) And this being the object and purpose for which
this space between the Tabernacle and the camp was always
left, it follows from this fact that, if the numbers of the con
gregation, even as confined to the male adults, were not less
than 600,000, this vacant space must have been large enough
to afford convenient standing-room for 600,000 men at least,
and occasionally, without much inconvenience, even for twice
as many grown up persons of both sexes. Assuming then
that every sueh gro-wn up member of the congregation would
want a square yard of ground to stand upon, we cannot esti
mate the extent of the space, so required and so reserved
between the Tabernacle and the camp, at less than half an
EngUsh mUe every way, 880 x 880 yards, or 774,400 square
yards — ^though that would be abundantly suflficient to accom
modate 603,550 adults at any time, and on extraordinary
occasions, without much jiersonal inconvenience, even twice
as many.

QUEST. XVII.] Camp, and Necessities ofthe People. 127
(184.) To this very probable argument of the extent of
the space in question, we may add the following. Ac
cording to the tradition of the Jews, (handed down from
the earliest antiquity,) the proper measure of that, which in
aftertimes was called a Sabbath day's journey, was determined
in the first instance by the distance between the court of
the Tabernacle, and the furthest extremity of the general
encampment — which, it appears from Numb. ii. 3, x. 14, was
the camp of Judah. And though the Jews in later times
appear also to have considered the measure of the Sabbath
day's journey, differently exprest, the same thing as 3000
cubits — in our Sa-viour's time, the journey in question, in
terms of any other measure of distance, as it may be collected
from Acts i. 12, Luke xxiv. 50, John xi. 18, must have been
reckoned equal to the distance from Mount Olivet to Jeru
salem ; fifteen stades, in terms of the Olympic stade, and one
mile and an half of our measure, at the rate of ten Olympic
stades to one English mile.
(185.) The entire distance then of the court of the Taber
nacle from the furthest extremity of the camp, ha-ving been
one English mile and an half — and the particular space be
tween the court of the Tabemacle and the nearest extremity
of the camp, by the reason of things, and the necessity of the
case, ha-ving been already so nearly determined to half a mile,
this coincidence leaves it scarcely doubtful that the Taber
nacle itself was always situated half a mile from the nearest
extremity of the camp, and a mile and an half from the
furthest. (186.) And this leads at once to the discovery of the pro
bable size of the camp. For the camp of Ephraim being the
nearest to the court of the Tabernacle, and the camp of Judah
the furthest from it — if the court of the Tabernacle was half
a mile from the former, and a mUe and an half from the latter,
the camp of Ephraim must have been just one mile distant
from the camp of Judah : and these two camps lying due east
and west of each other, the length of the camp, due east and
west, must have been one English mile. But whether its
length from north to south also was one mile too, can
not necessarily be inferred simply from the fact that such
was its length or breadth from east to west. It must be

128 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xvn.
determined, if at all, by the numbers of the entire population,
and by the space which would be required for their accommo
dation. (187.) Now the entire population of the Twelve Tribes
being assumed at 1,396,193, the number of tents, at the
rate of six persons to every tent, (two of the parents, four
ofthe children,) which these would require would be 216,032.
And each of these tents being supposed to have occupied an
area or ground floor of seven yards by four, (twenty-eight
yards,) altogether they would require an area of 6,048,896
yards. An oblong square of two English miles (3530 yards) in
length, and one mile (1760 yards) in breadth, would enclose
a space of 6,195,300 yards — 146,304 more than 6,048,896.
It is manifest therefore that within an oblong square of this
description it would be possible to arrange 316,033 tents,
each standing on a ground fioor of twenty-eight yards, in
three ( = fom-) sets of parallel rows, each of them containing
a fourth part of the whole, 54,008 tents — one for each of the
four particular camps, included in the one general camp — and
yet allowing space for one general passage, across the camp
from east to west, of twenty yards in breadth at least, and
for two more, from north to south, separating the camp of
Judah from the camp of Reuben and the camp of Dan, on
the one hand, and the camp of Reuben and the camp of Dan
from the camp of Ephraim, on the other, each of them ten
yards broad at least.
(188.) Such, to the best of my judgment, is the idea which
may be formed at present, from the data supplied by Scrip
ture at least, both of the four smaller camps of the IsraeUtes
in the wilderness, and of the one great camp, comprehending
them all. And it appears to me to be much confirmed by the
description of the prospect of both, which must have been
exhibited to Balaam, from the heights of Moab, when he
uttered the words at Numb, xxiii. 10, " Who can count the
dust of Jacob, and the number of the fourth part of Israel ?"
And still more, on a later occasion, when he saw Israel
abiding in his tents. Numb. xxiv. 3, and broke out into the
exclamation, ver 5, " How goodly are thy tents, O Jacob, and
thy tabernacles, O Israel !" For so they would be presented
to his view — one large collection of Tents, arranged in this

Quest, xvii.] Camp, and Necessities ofthe People. 129
goodly array, yet subdivided into four smaUer collections of
the same kind, each disposed in the same orderly manner.
(189.) With regard then to the question, which still re
mains to be answered. That of the daily necessities of the
people — Where and How to be attended to, during this state
of things under the Tabernacle and in the camp ? the reader
-wUl search in vain for any directions on that point in the
Pentateuch itself. And if so, he will probably agree with me
in thinking it were much better left in the silence in which
Scripture (perhaps purposely) has wrapt it up, than dragged
into open discussion at the present day.
To refer to Deuter. xxiii, 9-14, as specifying the rule of
observance in this respect during the life which the people had
been leading for the last forty years before those words were
spoken, would be to do, as Dr. Colenso has done (44), mistake
what was intended of the future, as if historical of the past.
It is clear, from the language of this passage itself, that it
enjoins 21, future rule of conduct of a certain kind; and that
both the injunction, and the terms in which it is expressed,
are adapted to a case which might be of frequent occurrence in
time to come, but had never yet occurred — that -viz. of the na
tion, after its settlement in the promised land, its going forth
on a miUtary expedition against any of its enemies, and that
of God, as their only recognised King and Leader, both in
peace and in war, his going forth with them ; and the neces
sity consequently laid upon them of living for a longer or a
shorter time in the open field — in the camp as such — in the
presence, and as it were under the eyes, of God himself. For
that this was one of the promises speciaUy held out to, and
conferred on, the chosen people of God, both as an encourage
ment to obedience on their part, and as the reward of it also
— that God himself would go forth, on such occasions, with
their armies — is certain ; and that he did actually accompany
them, on such occasions, in the recognised symbol of his pre
sence, under the theocracy, the ark, is certain also. That the
Priests, whose duty it was to attend on the ark wherever it
went, were bound to take part in any military expedition,
as matter of course, may be collected from Deuter. xx. 1-4;
cf. Numb. xiv. 44. The ark, as we read Josh. vi. 4-30, and
the Priests its attendants, marched between the van and the
K

130 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xvii.
rear of the army of the Israelites at the beginning of their wars
in Canaan, on each of the seven days' compassing of Jericho.
The ark, as we read i Sam. iv. 3, 4, was purposely fetched to
be present at the battle of Ebenezer or Aphek, when it was
permitted to faU into the hands of the PhUistines : and we
learn, from an incidental allusion, 3 Sam. xi. 11, that the ark,
as well as the soldiers of Israel, was encamped in the open
air while the siege of Rabbah, in the reign of Da-vid, was
still going on.
(190.) It is the personal presence of the Deity on such
occasions as these, attested by that of the ark, and his walk
ing in the midst of the camp in that sense, which is the foun
dation of the injunction, Deut. xxiii. 9. 13-14, to keep every
thing offensive to decency out of his sight. It had nothing
to do with the rule which might have been observed for the
last forty years in the -wilderness. I confess that, if the
Tabemacle had always been pitched in the midst of the
camp,, the spirit and principle of this injunction might have
been applicable to the life in the camp, in the presence of the
Tabemacle, and of the ark. But the Tabernacle defacto was
never pitched in the midst of the camp — and one reason why
it never was, among others, might have been this, that whUe
the residence of God was protected by its own position from
any defilement ab extra, the enforcement of cleanliness in the
camp might be left to the ordinary sense of propriety, and
the ordinary rules, which regulate such things in ci-vilized
social life every where *.
* Before Dr. Colenso had allowed himself to bring forward the objection
insisted upon in his Sixth Chapter (44, 45), he would have done well to
reflect on the peculiarity of the diet of the Israelites, during their forty
years' sojourn in the wilderness, and what allowance would require to be
made for that on this particular question of the daily necessities of the
people. This peculiar diet, as every one knows, or ought to know, from the
sixteenth day of the second month, in the first year of the Exodus, May
II, B.C. 1560, (Fasti Catholici, ii. 231-235 : Origines Kai. Hellenicse, i.
Prolegomena, Ixi : Three Witnesses, 95,) to the sixteenth of the Paschal
(and very probably the same) month in the first year of the Eisodus,
B.C. 1520, (cf. Exod. xvi. 35, Joshua v. to-12,) (an interval of forty
years, and very probably forty years complete,) was Manna. For the
next forty years then, after the beginning of this dispensation, (though it

quest. xvii.J Camp, and Neces.ntie.'i of the People. 131
might have required some time to reconcile the people who came out of
Egypt at first to this peculiar diet,) it may be taken for granted that the
Israelites in the desert lived principally, if not entirely, on Manna. We
read at least of no rairaculous supply of food of any other description,
after this had once begun to be provided for them, except the second
miracle of quails, (Numb. xi. 4-6, 18-23, 31-34') ^t Kibroth-Hattaavab,
in the second or third month of the second year of the Exodus. And
though we do read of complaints about the Manna, (Numb. xxi. 5,) in the
last year of the Exodus, as if the people were tired of living so long on
that kind of food only, we read of no provision of any other kind to
gratify their appetite on that second occasion, as had been done on the
former. Numb. xi. 6 ; but on the contrary, of a judgment expressly in
flicted for the murmuring about the Manna, at this time, in the plague of
the fiery serpents, Numb. xxi. 6-9. It does not appear that, during the
intermediate period from the first year of the Exodus to the last, even the
milk of their flocks and herds, much less the flesh, was ordinarily used by
the people for food. Every thing which is actually on record, bearing on
this question, conspires to the inference that during the whole of this
sojourn in the wilderness, the only, and certainly the principal, means of
the subsistence of the Israelites, was the daily supply of Manna.
Dr. Colenso, if I rightly collect his opinion from his own admissions,
is not indisposed to believe in the miracle ofthe Manna; and if so, I take
it for granted that he would not be disinclined to agree with any one else,
who believed in a miracle of that kind, that the Manna, so provided, could
not have been in any sense, or in any degree, the ordinary food of man.
The ordinary food of mankind is either vegetable or animal — and the
Manna was neither of these. It was certainly not an animal substance :
and though there have been expositors of Scripture foolish enough to ima
gine it was a natural production of the desert of Arabia, called by the same
name at present— we may safely venture to say, it was no more a vegetable
substance of any kind, in the sense of a natural production of the ground
or of trees, at present, than an animal one. It is clear from the language
of the people about it (Manna ! What is this?) that they knew nothing
of it before they saw it for the first time on the morning of the i6th of
Zif or Jar, May 1 1, B. C. 1560, Exod. xvi. 15, 31, cf. Deut. viii. 3 : and
it is certain that after the morning of the 15th of Zif or Jar, B. C. 1520,
they never saw it again, except in the omerful of it, laid up by command
of the Deity himself, Exod. xvi. 32-34, soon after it began to be given, as
a memorial of its former existence to all future generations. It might
resemble some known vegetable production in shape, as we are told it
did coriander seed, and other natural substances in colour, as we are
told it did bdellium ; and some natural substance, or some of the artificial
productions ofthe confectioner, (as fresh oil, or as wafers made with honey,)
in taste — Exod. xvi. 31, Numb. xi. 7, 8, xxi. 5 : but it was none of those
things itself. It descended every night along with the dew; Exod. xvi.
13, 14, Numb. xi. 9. Our Saviour calls it Bread from heaven; John vi.
31, 32. So does the Psalmist, cv. 40; and in another instance, Ixxviii.
K 3

132 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch, [quest, xvii.
23-25, the Corn of heaven — to send down which God expressly com
manded the clouds, and opened the doors of heaven ; and in eating of
which, so sent him down from heaven, man did eat Angels'' food. Cf Ne
hemiah ix. 20 also. Let us then consider for a moment with what pecu
har rules and restrictions this dispensation of Manna, in order to answer
the end and purpose for which it was intended, was accompanied from the
first, i. That it vvas to be gathered, every day for the day, and hy each
individual, or for each individual, of the same family, alike, ii. That the
same rate or amount of it was to be gathered for each, without distinction,
for any thing which appears to the contrary, of age or sex. iii. That the
limit of this rate or amount, in every case, was to be the same — so much
as was defined and exprest by an omerful. iv. The peculiarity of this
measure of an omerful, which occurs for the first and the last time in
Scripture, in connection with the prescribed rate or amount of the
Manna, which was to be gathered by every individual, or for every indi
vidual, member of the congregation, every day — necessarily leading to the
inference that this peculiar measure came into existence with and /or this
particular use and application of it, in this dispensation of the Manna, and
went out again, as soon as that dispensation came to an end. v. And
lastly, besides all this, and even after the Manna had been collected, sub
ject to the restrictions enjoined, as it might be supposed, by each indivi
dual for himself, or for every member of his ou n household, as well as for
himself — the special interference of God himself, to work a miracle, if
necessary, (possibly every day,) lest the actual quantity gathered or con
sumed should be either more or less than the prescribed amount. Exod.
xvi. 17: " And the children of Israel did so, and gathered some more,
some less. ver. 18, And when they did mete it with an omer, he that
gathered much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no
lack." It seems to me that laying these several peculiarities of the dispensation
together, and especially, taking this last ofthem into account — we can come
to no other conclusion, with respect to the true nature and properties of
this particular food, which, after the Israelites of old, we still call Manna,
but which Scripture calls Angels' Food, than this j That as there could
have been nothing defective in it, when applied and used in the proper
raanner for its proper purpose, so there could have been nothing redun
dant ; and consequently it raust have differed from every other kind of
food, whether vegetable or animal, by which human life is capable of being
sustained, and the daily wear and tear of human strength is capable of
being repaired — in leaving no jrepiTTu/ia — nothing superfluous, and requir
ing to be carried off through the intestinal canal — after supplying the
necessary wants of the body.
The Rabbis of the Jews have recorded many wonderful things of the
pecuhar diet of their forefathers in the desert; and, if I am not mis
taken, this among the rest, that it left nothing superfluous, like ordi
nary food, behind it, — no TrfpiVroj/ia, or excrementum. And though we
are not bound to believe every thing of this kind, on the authority of the

QUEST. xviii.J Cattle In the Desert. 133

Question XVIII. — The Sheep and Cattle of ihe Israelites in the
Desert.

(Colenso, ch. xii. pp. 65-81.)

(191.) Page 65 (79) : "And the children of Israel did eat
manna forty years, untU they came to a land inhabited;
they did eat manna until they came unto the borders of the
land of Canaan." E. xvi. 35.
"'Yh.Q people, we are told, were supplied with manna. But
there was no miraculous pro-vision of food for the herds and
flocks. They were left to gather sustenance, as they could, in
that inhospitable -wilderness. We will now go on to consider
the possibUity of such a multitude of cattle (3,000,000) (71)
finding any means of support, for forty years, under these
circumstances." (192.) Such is the question proposed in this chapter — the
rest of which is taken up with the proof both from arguments
of its own, and also from the testimony of those who have
visited and explored the scene of the wanderings of the
children of Israel, of what, I for my part should have been
ready to concede, as a self-evident proposition — that the desert
of Arabia Petrsea could not have been competent of itself, to
maintain the flocks and herds of the Israelites for a single
day, much less for forty years. And though Dr. Colenso does
not himself in so many words draw the obvious inference from
this state of the case, that, if actually taken along with their
Rabbis, yet some traditions, on so extraordinary and interesting a fact as
that of the peculiar food of their ancestors during their forty years' life in
the wilderness, could scarcely fail to go down to posterity ; — and among
these, none perhaps would be a priori more credible than this — to which
I have just adverted. If so, (and to return to the question with which
we set out,) the difficulties raised by Dr. Colenso, in his Sixth Chapter,
relating to the daily necessities of the people, if he had reflected at all
on the probable state of the case during their sojourn in the desert, might
have appeared even to himself to be purely imaginary, and quite inapplic
able to the circumstances of the time and place.

134 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xviii.
owners into this desert, and there left to themselves, these flocks
and herds must speedily have perished, he evidently expects it
to be drawn by his readers, or, as their only alternative, if they
would escape from that conclusion, to be believed, (as he is
manifestly disposed himself to believe,) that these flocks and
herds were never taken from Egypt into the desert at all,
and that the Scripture account of the Exodus, in that one of
its particulars, is unhistorical and untrue.
(193.) That the desert of Arabia, the destined scene of these
wanderings of the Israelites, with every thing belonging to
them, for forty years, could have afforded subsistence for their
flocks and herds, any more than for themselves, in my opinion,
as I have already observed, it is superfluous to deny, and it
would be a waste of time to disprove. I propose to join issue
with Dr. Colenso on these two questions of fact only. Whether,
if taken into the desert along with their owners at the Exodus,
under such circumstances as they are represented to have been,
they could have been taken thither merely to perish ? or if they
could not find subsistence in the natural productions of the
desert. Whether no miracle would be wrought to provide it for
them in some other way ?
(194.) To come however to a right judgment on this ques
tion in particular. What was or was not to be expected
of God a priori in behalf of the cattle of his people, as much
as of themselves, we must begin with a more general one, that
of the rule or principle of the Divine proceedings in favour of
those, whom God had once taken into covenant with himself
(like the family of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob), and once made
the special objects of covenanted promises.
(195.) That temporal blessings were of the number of these
promises and privileges, and among temporal blessings, what
soever in these times most properly constituted wealth, it re
quires no argument to prove ; and that riches as such, in these
times, and especially in the east, where social life was still
almost every where Pastoral and Nomadic life, must have con
sisted chiefly of flocks and herds, is equally indisputable. The
Hebrew term for cattle, Mecouneh, is just as often used for
Substance in the sense of riches also ; riches in these primitive
times consisting principally of possessions of this kind, more
than of any thing else.

QUEST. XVIII.] Cattle in the Desert. 135
(196.) Thus in various passages of Genesis"', we read of
Abraham and Isaac, that, besides silver and gold, and men-
servants and maidservants, they had cattle of every descrip
tion also, in great abundance; and in others^, of a special
oeconomy of the Di-vine Providence itself, for the very pur
pose of increasing the possessions of Jacob of this kind also,
during the last six or seven years of his sojourn with Laban.
And among the other temporal blessings which the people of
God, after their settlement in Canaan, on condition of obedi
ence to all the laws of God, were both authorised and entitled
to expect from Him, this of the increase of their cattle is
just as often, and as specifically, insisted on, as any tjiing
else^. (197.) On this principle of the covenanted dealings of God
with those whom He had once chosen, to stand in a peculiar
relation to Himself, it was a pirlori to be expected that, if it
made part of the plan of His Pro-vidence to multiply an
handful of souls, standing in that relation to Himself, into
a numerous nation, it must have entered into the same Pro
vidential eeconomy to multiply their possessions of every kind,
and especially their flocks and herds, in something like the
same proportion. Accordingly in that manifestation of God
to Abraham, Gen. xv. i-3i, of which I gave an account
supra (66 sqq.), it was distinctly promised, (ver. 13-16,) that
the seed of Abraham, having previously gone down to Egypt,
and previously been raised into a nation there, when they
came out at last to return to their own land, should do so
" with great substance" — where the Hebrew term is one whieh,
according to Gesenius, means KT-rffj,aTa — what they had ac
quired and gotten — in Egypt— and could describe nothing so
properly at the Exodus, as the additions made to their flocks
and herds during their residence in that country. It was no
doubt with a view to the augmentation of their possessions of
this kind, apparently in the natural way, during this sojourn,
that Providence so ordered it that they were placed at the
Descent itself in that part of Egypt, where only possessions
c Gen. xii. 16; xiii. 2.6; xiv. 14-16; xx. 14; xxiv. 1.35; xxv. 1 1 ; xxvi.
12-14. '' Gen. xxx. 31-43 ; xxxi. 7-1-! : cf. xxxi. 18 ; xxxii. 10, 13-21 ;
xxxiii. 17. e Exod. xxiii. 26: Deuteron. vii. 13, 14; viii. 13-18 ; xi. 15 ;
xxviii. 4-11 ; xxx. 9.

136 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xviii.
of this description could appear to increase and multiply
independently even of the Divine Blessing upon them — the
Land of Goshen — because there only, as we have seen (164),
there was abundant subsistence for flocks and herds all through
the year.
(198.) And though nothing is expressly said of this in
crease of their cattle, during the interval between the Descent
and the Exodus, as well as of themselves, that it must have
gone on all the time pari passu with that of the people, may
be inferred from the facts of the year which preceded the
Exodus. We read for instance, Exod. ix. 1-7, that, in the
plague of murrain, all the cattle of Egypt died; and yet, vers.
19-36, even after this, at the time of the plague of hail, that
the Egyptians had again cattle of aU kinds in the flelds —
many of which too must have become the -victims of that
second -visitation. And how is this fact to be explained so as
to be consistent with the other ? Simply by the fact, on the
one hand, specifled before, Exod. ix. 4, 6, 7, that of the cattle
of the Israelites not one died in the plague of murrain, and
by the fact on the other hand, that between this plague and
that of the hail, there was another, that of the boils — and
consequently between the plague of murrain and the plague
of hail, very possibly there was an interval of as much as two
months, during which the Egyptians, ha-ving lost all their pos
sessions of this kind by the murrain, had time and opportu
nity to replace that loss, by buying others from the Israelites,
before the plague of hail. But on this supposition the Israelites
must have had enough and to spare of the same kind of posses
sions. In a word, as we read of the promise of the augmenta
tion of their wealth of this kind, during their sojourn in
Egypt, Gen. xv. 14 — so do we of its fulfilment at Exod. xii.
38 — " In the mixed multitude, and the flocks and the herds,
even very much cattle" — which went out with them at the
Exodus also : where the original word is again Mecouneh —
and should here also have been rendered by substance, as we
explained supra — such substance as in these times constituted
wealth — i. e. possessions, consisting of cattle in particular.
(199.) And that all the possessions of this kind, acquired
previously in Egypt, were intended from the ^rst to be taken
away with them at the Exodus, may be inferred from Exod.

QUEST. XVIII.] Cattle in the Desert. 137
X. 9, before the plague of locusts, "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 :" (cf. viii. 36
also, after the plague of flies :) and especially from x. 34-36,
just after the plague of darkness, and just before the plague
of the firstborn : ver. 36, " Our cattle also shall go with us ;
there shall not an hoof be left behind." And yet, in the face
of all these promises, and all these engagements of the Divine
veracity, and aU these special arrangements and providences
to carry them into effect ; in spite of all this care and soli
citude that the temporal possessions of the people of God
of this kind, in Egypt previously, should thus be multiplied,
and every thing of that kind so multiplied thus be taken
along with them at last, so that even an hoof should not
be left behind — it is seriously inculcated by a Christian bishop
that, if they were taken out of Egypt at all, along with
their owners, they were taken out only to perish in the wUder
ness of hunger and thirst.
(200.) But not to insist on any such inconsistency as this,
— simply to argue this question as one of fact — I would
demand of those who are not prepared to deny that the
cattle of the Israelites must have gone out with them at the
Exodus, yet are prepared to deny, or at least disposed to
doubt, that any extraordinary provision was made for their
support in the wilderness — how they account for the fact
that, more than a month after the departure from Egypt, at
the time of the arrival at Eephidim, Exod. x-vii. 1-7, Numb.
xxxiii. 14, the cattle were still alive, and in want of nothing
at that time but water ? Or how they account for the fact
that, two months after the Exodus, just on the eve of the
delivery of the Law, the cattle, which ought to have been
starved to death long before this time, were still alive, and to
all appearance at this very time in want of nothing except to
be restrained from feeding too near the mount ? (Exod. xix.
13, 13; cf. vers. 31, 33 ; and Hebrews xii. 30.) Or how they
account for the fact, that fifty days later, at least, they were
still living, and still feeding, in the same security as before,
on what was yet to be found for their support in the vicinity
of mount Horeb ? Exod. xxxiv. 3. Or how they account for
the fact that, in the second month of the second year of the

138 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xviii.
Exodus, the cattle of the people in general were so numerous
that the firstlings only among them, were equal in number to
the cattle of the Le-vites collectively, and the cattle of the
Levites in general were taken in exchange for the firstlings of
the cattle of the people, as no more than equivalent to them.
Numb. iii. 41-45 ? Or how they account for the fact that, a
month after this, and fourteen months after the Exodus, just
before the second miracle of quails, the flocks and the herds,
which had been living all this time on nothing but what the
desert of Arabia could afford them, were stUl so numerous
tha|, in the opinion of Moses, Numb. xi. 33, they were com
petent to have furnished a month's subsistence for the people
among whom he was, 600,000 footmen at least, if not more
than twice that number of aU ages, and both sexes ? How again,
wiU they account for the fact that, thirty-nine years after the
Exodus, when the scene of Rephidim and Massah, in the first
year, was repeated at Meribah- Kadesh in the last year. Numb.
XX. 3-13; (cf. XX. 8;) xxvii. 14: Deut. xxxii. 51, the cattle
belonging to the congregation were still alive, as weU as
themselves, and again, at this time, in want of nothing ap
parently, no more than they, but water ? Or, how will they
account for the fact that, even after this, just on the eve of
the Eisodus, this description of the possessions of all the
Tribes, in the case of three, the Tribe of Reuben, the Tribe of
Gad, and half the Tribe of Manasseh, had become so numerous
as to lead to a special petition on the part of their owners,
and a special concession on the part of Moses, that they
should receive their share of the common inheritance on that
side of the Jordan, in the recently conquered country of
Sihon and Og-, because that was a region adapted to posses
sions of this kind in particular? Numb, xxxii. 1 ; Deut. iii. 19.
It cannot be said, these were merely their share of the spoils
of those two kingdoms ; for on that principle the flocks and
herds of the rest of the Tribes must have been as numerous as
theirs ; and the same request might for just the same reason
have been preferred by any of them. But if not, then these
flocks and herds of the Reubenites, Gadites, and Mauassites,
must have been in a great measure the natural descendants of
those which came originally out of Egypt, and instead of
diminishing in the desert, much less perishing all of them

quest, xviii.] Cattle in the Desert. 139
meanwhUe, had not only lived, but multipUed beyond what
they were at first.
(201.) Now that this could have been brought about by
natural means, that the bare sands of Arabia could have fed
3,000,000 head of cattle, (according to Dr. Colenso's calcula
tion,) regularly and plentifully, with their own spontaneous
productions, exceeds all credibility. But if it could not have
been the effect of natural means, by what could it have been
done, but preternatural ? If these flocks and herds were not
only maintained from day to day, and from year to year, and
not only thereby kept alive, but, as living in the midst of
plenty, enabled also to increase and multiply, by what could
they have been thus maintained, in the desert of Arabia,
independently of the desert, and independently of their owners,
but the power of God ?
(202.) But to this obvious explanation of the fact. Dr.
Colenso objects, that there is no account on record of a mira
culous provision like this for the necessities of the cattle of the
Israelites ; leaving it to be inferred that, if none such is actuaUy
recorded, none such could have been made. Whether the fact
is, as it would thus be assumed to be — whether there is not,
after all, something in Scripture from which such a miraculous
provision for the cattle of the Israelites may be consequen
tially inferred, I hope to inquire by and by. Meanwhile I
beg leave to demur to the prineipile which seems to me to lie
at the bottom of the objection, viz. That if God wrought a
miracle on any occasion, in a given order and course of things
of which Scripture was giving an account, it must necessarily
be noticed in that account. This assumjition, it appears to
me, makes a great deal more of miracles, than Scripture, on
its o-wn principles, would be disposed to do, or would authorise
us to do. There is no such thing in Scripture as Nature — as
the Laws of Nature — as the order and course of Nature — no
thing but God, and God's Laws, and God's order and course
of things. God, in Scripture, mediately or immediately, per-
missively or personally, is the doer of every thing. God is all
in all. It is God's wUl, God's power, God's Providence, God's
appointment, which does every thing and orders every thing —
in Scripture — which made every thing what it is, which keeps
it what it was made while it continues such, which suspends.

140 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xvm.
or modifies, or changes, its original constitution, as it thinks
fit. Regarded in this point of view, nothing, which comes
de facto to pass, in the opinion of Scripture can be miracu
lous, as referable to its only true efiicient cause, and true
Author ; and even to our own apprehensions, the ordinary and
the extraordinary, in the actual course of things, with the
same relation to the only true Author of either, should both
appear miraculous, or neither.
(203.) What reason then, on this principle, would there be
to expect that in the account of God's own dealings with His
own creatures, in His own world, and for His own purposes,
— an account too dictated and recorded by His o-wn Spirit, —
every special interposition of His Power and Providence, every
miracle as we should consider it, should necessarily be related,
as if it must needs be something as wonderftd in the estima
tion of Scripture, or of the Spirit which dictated Scripture, as
it might be in ours ? It may very well be questioned — with
the e-vidence of 3 Kings ii. 19-33 ; iii. 16-30 ; iv. 1-44 ; v. 3-
14,36,37; xiii. 14-31, 35 before us — whether all the miracles,
performed by the Prophets under the old Dispensation, are
actually recorded in the Old Testament ; but it must be cer
tain from John xx. 30, xxi. 35j as well as from the internal
e-vidence of the Gospels themselves, that an incalculably small
part only of those of our Saviour has been left on record : and
equally so, from the Acts of the Apostles, that we have not a
tithe of those which were afterwards performed by the Apostles,
and the rest of the first Preachers of Christianity, historically
related in that work.
(204.) So much then for the argument against the fact of
a miracle in a particular instance, from the silence of an in
spired account about it. But what if express testimony to
such a fact in a particular instance is wanting ? Is our own
reason, nevertheless, incompetent to infer it for itself, if the
premises which lead to such an inference are actually on record
in Scripture ? Let us apply this argument from sUence, to a
particular case. Suppose Deut. viii. 4, xxix. 5, and Nehemiah
ix. 31, absent at present from the page of Scripture — as they
might be, so far as the occurrence of either in the proper order
ofthe history is concerned. If any one, who reflected on the cir
cumstances under which the Israelites must have been living

QUEST. XVIII.] Cattle in the Desert. 141
perpetuaUy between the Exodus and the Eisodus — that is, as a
body of men and women, constantly moving about on foot,
for forty years, yet excluded from all intercourse -with other
nations — had seen reason to infer that such necessary wants
even under those circumstances, as change of clothing or
change of shoes, in their case must have been pro-vided for in
some extraordinary way, will any one, with the incidental
allusion to that way, both Deut. viii. 4, xxix. 5, and Nehemiah
ix-31, before his eyes, maintain that such an inference must
have been wrong, because the fact itself was not historically
related ?
(205.) And what need, we may further demand, for express
testimony to a miracle of a certain kind, with such testimony
actually on record to a miracle the same in kind, but much
greater in degree? Must not the lesser miracle be included
in the greater, where the principle of both was the same, and
the end and object of both, mutatis mutandis, were the same
also ? And must not the fact of the greater, under such
circumstances, vouch for that of the lesser ?
(206.) When I speak of a greater miracle of this kind, the
fact of which duly attested is, or ought to be, a competent
voucher for the fact of a lesser one of the same kind, and
directed to the same end and purpose, the reader -will of course
understand that I mean the provision of sustenance for the
Israelites themselves, in the shape of the Manna, (which the
Psalmist as we have seen calls Angels' food, and our Saviour,
Bread from, heaven^ the best attested, and the most unques
tionable in point of fact, of all the extraordinary circum
stances and characteristics of this extraordinary sera. If
God thus took the whole nation of the Israelites, and every
individual household among them, into His own keeping,
every day for forty years, is it surprising that he should
have taken every thing belonging to them, which stood in
need of daily sustenance as much as themselves, for the same
space of time, into His own keeping also ? Would not the
same goodwill towards His own people, which moved Him
unasked to do the one, induce Him of His own accord to do
the other ? or will it be seriously maintained that the Power
which was able to rain Manna down from the air, every day,
for forty years, was not able to make the grass spring from

142 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xviu.
the surface of the ground, for the same length of time ? And
if there was both an adequate motive to originate, and an
adequate power to effectuate, even such a dispensation as this
in favour of the fiocks and herds of the people, what more do
we require to certify us of the fact of it ? It is undeniable that
on more than one occasion f, the same water, which was pro
vided (and by miracle) for the people, was pro-vided for their
cattle also ; and food to eat being as essential to the daily
subsistence of beast as well as man, as water to drink, who
can consider it probable that one of these necessities would be
provided daily for either, and not the other also ? In a word,
so natural and so necessary must the connection between these
two things, the maintenance of the people, and the mainte
nance of every thing belonging to them, during the whole of
this sojourn of both in the desert, either both in the ordinary
or both in the extraordinary way, appear to common sense,
that we could desire no better proof of the latter than the
clear and indisputable testimony which Scripture itself has
left on record to the former. And this brings us to the ques
tion, to which I alluded supra (303) — Whether Scripture,
after aU, is so silent, as Dr. Colenso and those who think with
him assume, either as to the fact in general, or to the mode
in particular, of an express provision like this for the daily
wants of the flocks and herds, as much as for those of the
people. (207.) And on this question, I begin with obsei-ving that, if
there are any two ideas more distinct from, and more opposed
to, each other, and less liable to be confounded in the habits
and modes of thought of the inhabitants, or neighbours, of the
Desert, in the East, than any others, they are these two, that
of the Deseet, and that of the Field, which in the Arabic is
called the Tell. The geography of the wild Arab, bordering
on Egypt, knows of no comprehensive distinctions of the sur
face of the earth, but these three, of the Deseet, the Tell,
and the Ri-vee, meaning by this last, the Nile : and in his
apprehension, what is not the Deseet is either the Tell or
the RivEE, and what is not the Tell or the Rivee is the
Deseet. There is a remarkable illustration of this in Bruce's
Travels g, in the account of his inter-view with the Shekh of
1' Exod. -Xvii. 1-3 ; Numb. xx. 4, 8. 11. s i. 146-153.

QUEST. XVIII.] Cattle in the Desert. 143
the Tribe Ababde — and of the oath, by which he and his
people are there represented to have bound themselves, for
his security among them, and wheresoever their influence
extended h ; whereby they declared themselves and their chil
dren accursed, if ever they lifted their hands against him in
the Tell, or Field, in the Deseet, or on the Ri-vee : i. e. on
any part of the surface of the earth, of which they had any
knowledge, or with which they had any thing to do.
(208.) Now this, which iu the nomenclature of the Arabs
is called the Tell, in the Hebrew is precisely the same thing
as the Shedeh ; the first instance of the occurrence of whicii
is Gen. ii. 19, 30, in the mention of the Ileithheshedeh, or
Beasts of the Field, as then and there brought to Adam, to
receive from him their names. Heithheshedeh, as I have shewn
in my Three Witnesses ', is that description of animals, which,
whether wild or tame, is naturally graminivorous and ordi
narUy ruminant ; and consequently was necessarily from the
first associated with the Shedeh, because there, and there only,
was its natural subsistence to be found. For this word, She
deh, in the Hebrew, according to Gesenius, denoted nothing
so properly as the open, and generally speaking level, part of
the surface of the earth, the natural covering of which is
Geass; the natural food of all grazing animals as such. In
that sense, it stood opposed not only to the arable part of the
earth's surface, (the shedeh broken up by the plough, and sown
with grain of any kind,) but even to the shedeh itself, as
covered indeed with grass, but those grasses allowed to mature
or ripen their seeds, i. e. the shedeh turned into a meadow.
Shedeh, in short, in the Hebrew was nothing but the natural
surface of the earth, covered as yet with nothing but grass,
and such grass too, as was meant in the Hebrew by Dasse, in
contradistinction to asel, the more mature and ripened vege
tation, cf. Gen. i. 11, 13, Deut. xxxii. 3, — the first sprouts of
grass, the tender and succulent grass, the still nascent and
springing, and not yet adolescent, much less mature, vegeta
tion of the surface of the earth, — the most suitable of all for
grazing animals to feed upon.
(209.) This word in the Hebrew, Shedeh, in the English
version is uniformly rendered by Field; and to enumerate
h i. 152. ' Three Witnesses, fi^-fiy.

144 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, x-^aii.
the instances of its occurrence, so rendered, would be almost
endless. Let a few specimens from Genesis only suffice : as
Gen. xxiv. 63 : "And Isaac went out to meditate in ihe field
at the eventide." — xxv. 37 : " And Esau was a cunning hunter,
a man of ihe field:" (cf. xxvu. 3 : "Go out to the field.-")—
xxvii. 37 : " The smell of a, fi.eld which the Loed hath blessed."
— xxxiii. 19 ; "And he bought a parcel of Sk field." — xxxiv. 5 :
" Now his sons were with his cattle in the field," (cf. -ver. 7 :
" Came out of the field.") — xxxiv. 38 : " That which was in
the city, and that which was in the field:" — xxxvii. 15 : "A
certain man found him (Joseph), and behold he was wander
ing in the field." — xlvii. 30 : " For the Egyptians sold every
man his field." — xl-vii. 34 : " For seed of the field." In all
these instances, the Field evidently means what we have
explained the Hebrew Shedeh to do — the plain and open
surface of the ground, the natural covering of which is the
herbage, in which grazing and ruminant animals find their
proper food ; designed consequently by nature first and pro
perly for pasturing — yet capable also of being broken up, and
sown with corn.
(210.) Now such being the proper sense of the Hebrew
Shedeh and the English Field, and such the essential dif
ference of the Field as sueh, and the Deseet as such, let the
reader attend to the following coincidence ; -viz. That, in the
account of proceedings after the Exodus, when there can be no
doubt the people had long been in the midst of the desert,
this word field occurs twice where we should have expected,
under such circumstances, that the word employed would
have been the desert. The first is Exod. xvi. 35, in reference
to the cessation of the gift of the manna on the sabbath,
" To-day ye shall not find it in the Field :" the other, Le\'it.
x-vii. 5, in the ordinance there enjoined. That from that time
forward, all animals intended by their owners to be killed for
food *, should be brought for that purpose to the door of the
* It is not indeed certain whether this was the object of those sacrifices,
or whether, as may also be inferred from \er. 7, they were not properly
sacrifices. But it makes no difference to the argument from the use
of the term^eW, in reference to the circumstances under which these ani
mals were before slain, whether they were intended as food, or as sacri
fices, or as both. Cf Deut. xii. 15. 21.

QUEST, xviii.] Cattle in the Desert. 145
Tabernacle, and not be slain, as they had been until then, in
the open Field, or as it is in the original, in the face of the
Field ; " To the end that the children of Israel may bring
their sacrifices, whicii they offer in the open Field, even that
they may bring them unto the Loed, unto the door of the
Tabernacle of the congregation."
(211.) What could be inferred from the phraseology ofthese
two passages, by one, who with a competent knowledge of the
Hebrew, were to read them detached from their context, and
in ignorance of the circumstances under which they were
really spoken, except that both the speakers, and those to
whom they were speaking, must have been at the time some
where in the Field, in the Open Field, i. e. in the midst
of the open country, — in the midst of green fields and pas
turing grounds at least ? And were he to be told that both,
at this very time, were in the desert of Arabia, surrounded, it
might be supposed, by nothing but an unbounded expanse of
sand, how could he reconcile that fact with the prima facie
meaning of the description of the same locality in each of the
above passages, as the Field, except by supposing that, in
these instances, by some means or other, the Deseet itself,
for the time, had been turned into the Field ?
(212.) Now let the reader reflect for a moment what must
have been the extent of tlm Field, round about the camp,
which was competent to receive the manna, daily let fall upon
it, for the daily subsistence of the whole people''; and what
the magnitude of that other Field, in which aU the flocks and
herds of this great multitude before and up to the time of
Lev. xvii. 5, must have been daUy pasturing and daily roam
ing, if, before that command was delivered, whosoever had
occasion to make use in any way of his own property in them,
was until then accustomed to find and to kill them — in the
face of that Field.
(213.) The great desert of Arabia indeed is an open plain,
miles upon miles in extent, on all sides ; but it is an expanse,
of this boundless description, of nothing but sand, or gravel,
or granite — ^yet here, both Exod. xvi. 35, and Levit. xvu. 5 —
the Israelites were in the midst of an open field on every side,
k Exod. xvi. 14-31, Numb. xi. 7-9, Deut. viii. 3. 16.
L

146 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, x-viil.
an expanse in every direction of grass and verdure. And
though they might not perhaps at this time be in the great
desert of Arabia, yet, wheresoever they were, it was stUl
in the neighbourhood of mount Horeb. And, -without en
tering at present on the much disputed question of the true
site of the Horeb of the Exodus, I wiU stUl declare my own
opinion on one point — viz. that, wheresoever it was situated, if
it was not an isolated rock, standing alone in solitary grandeur,
and rising abruptly from the ground on every side, and con
sequently capable of being encompassed by the whole camp of
the Israelites, or by a fence, if necessary'', one of its sides at
least, fronting the camp, must have done so' ; and opposite to
this there must have been an open plain, on which the people
themselves were encamped™, and on which there was room for
them to assemble between the camp and the mount °, to hear
the Law delivered — in which too, when not occupied by the
people", the cattle must have been accustomed to pasture :
and a plain, still open to the same uses, still supplying pasture
for cattle, forty or fifty days at least laterP.
(214.) What inference then could reason and common sense
draw from such premises as these, except that the IsraeUtes,
though marching all the time in the desert, and encamping,
as often as they did encamp, in the desert, and consequently,
as it might be supposed a priori in the midst of barren sands,
in some manner or other, whensoever and wheresoever they
pitched their tents, found themselves in the midst of the
FIELD — ^in the midst of a plain covered -with grass ? And
if so, not for appearance' sake — not for their own comfort's
sake — but for the sake of their cattle. Let us then proceed
to consider the cu-cumstances under which these movements
of theirs in the desert, according to the account of Scripture,
must have been made perpetually.
(215.) Scripture is express to the fact that from the begin
ning to the end of their forty years' journeyings in the -wUder
ness, they never stirred a step, they neither marched nor halted,
except as they were directed by their Heavenly Guardian;
condescending all this time to act the part of their conductor
¦^ Cf. Exod. xix. 12, 13, 2i-'23 : Hebr. xii. 18-20. 1 Exod. xix. 17,
ft. XX. 18. ™ xix. 2, 17, cf. XX. 18. " xix. 17, xx. 18. o xix.
11, 13, 21-23. P xxxiv. 3.

QUEST. XVIII.] Cattle in the Desert, 147
— and not in-visibly, through his unseen but equally effectual
Providence, but openly, and with a visible symbol of his per
sonal presence at their head, the pillar of the cloud by day,
and the pillar of fire by night P — " Who went in the way
before you, to search you out a^ place to pitch your tents in,
in fire by night, to shew you by what way ye should go, and
in a cloud by dayq." The pitching places of the people then,
in all their journeyings, were chosen not by themselves, but
by their All--wise and Almighty Leader for them : and that
being the case, we may be sm-e they were always the best and
fittest, for every purpose contemplated by them, and especiaUy
for the provision of three such indispensable requisites to the
daily subsistence of so numerous a following both of his rational
and of his irrational creatures, as manna for the former, and
grass for the latter, and water for both. EspeciaUy, as soon
as it is understood, (and as it may be proved -with very great
probabiUty from Scripture itself,) that the scene of their
journeyings was not the limited space between Kadesh-
Barnea and the granitic district of the Sinaitic peninsula on
the south and west, as it has commonly been supposed, but
the great desert of Arabia on the east^.
(216.) Now -with respect to those three requisites to the
daily subsistence of the followers in the train of their Divine
conductor, over the surface of this desert perpetually, manna
for the people, grass for the cattle, and water for both, to say
nothing more of the fii-st at present, (which to the best of our
own judgment would seem to be equally capable of being sup
pUed in the same way every where,) and to confine ourselves
to the two last ; though it behoves us to speak of the Divine
estimate of things with all diffidence in our own judgment,
that, which to a mere human apprehension would be most
likely to give the law to the other perpetuaUy, we may
venture to say would probably be the provision of water,
rather than the provision of grass. With respect to this
latter, if the mode of the pro-vision every where was simply
this, of turning the surface of the desert, for the time being.

P Exod. xiii. 17, 18, 21, 22, (cf. Numb. xiv. 14,) xiv. 19, 20, 24, xvi. 10, xxiv.
15-18, xl. 34-38 : Numb. ix. 15-23, x. 11,12: Ps. Ixxviii. 14, cv. 39 : Nehem.
ix. 19 : I Cor. x. i. 9 Deut. i. 33. r Cf. Deut. i. 19, 31, ii. 7,
viii. 15, xxxii. 10 : Jerem. ii. 6 : Hosea xiii. 5.
L 3

148 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch, [quest, xviii.
to the extent which the necessity of the case required, from
an expanse of sand into one of grass, for ought which we can
see to the contrary, any part of the desert a priori would seem
to have been as suitable for such a change as another. But
with respect to the provision of water the case might be dif
ferent. (217.) There are natural supplies of water in the desert of
Arabia or Syria, even at present ; known of too to the roving
inhabitants of those regions, and to the caravans, which tra
verse them every year at stated times : and no doubt there
were such, equally well known of, in ancient times. There
were probably more in former times, and probably are more
at present, which were unknown formerly, and are unknown
stUl — but which would be known to Omniscience formerly as
much as at present. One means consequently of the daily
supply of this daUy necessity, which the Di-vine leader and
guide of the Israelites might have employed, might be this, of
taking them to the spots where these natural springs were to
be found, either in the shape of wells, already dug, or though
still concealed from outward -view, so near the surface as to be
easily accessible. And we have an example of the former in
the twelve wells of Elim, Exod. xv. 37, Numb, xxxiii. 9, and
of the latter, in the revelation of the spring, called Beer on
that very account. Numb. xxi. 16-18 (cf. 33), so near to the
surface that it could be laid open by the staves of the Princes
of the congregation only. And in all such cases as these, the
miraculous oeconomy would probably reside not in the dis
covery of the water, so made known, but in the mode whereby
it was rendered effectual for the end and use designed by it —
the supply of this one of the wants of so large a collection
both of men and of animals. And that, to judge from the
analogy of parallel instances on record in Scripture — (the
barrel of meal, and the cruse of oil, the -widow of the pro
phet's pot of oil, the twenty loaves of the hundred, the five
loaves of the five thousand, and the seven loaves of the four
thousand — ) would probably consist in making a small spring
adequate to so great a demand — constantly drawn upon by
the people and their cattle, while they were stiU in its neigh
bourhood, yet never exhausted, never allowed to fail.
(218.) With respect however to what may be considered

QUEST, x-viii.] Cattle in the Desert. 1 49
the standing mode of the provision of this one want, all
through these journeyings in the -wilderness, I am inclined,
both from the testimony of Deut. viii. 15 — (confirmed by Ps.
Lxxviii. 15, 16, 20, cv. 41, cxiv. 8, Nehem. ix. 15) — which seems
to be given historically to the fact, and from the testimony of
I Cor. X. 4, however figuratively expressed — to believe that it
must have been by bringing it out of the rock. The first instance
of water so provided actually recorded is at Exod. xvii. 1-7,
-within little more than a month after the Exodus ; and that
was on every account a remarkable case of its kind, and evi
dently here related as such — the water, so produced, and
apparently for the first time, having been purposely caUed
Massah, Tentation, and Meribah, Contention — as if to com
memorate the fact that the people had there and in that way
chidden or contended with God, and there and in that way had
put it to the proof by actual trial, whether he was really pre
sent with, and among them, or not. The next is Numb. xx.
3-13 (cf. xxvU. 14, Deut. xxxii. 51); and that is stUl more
remarkable, not only because of its consequences to Moses
and Aaron, but for its bearing on this question. Whether
there was not a standing mode of the supply of water in the
wildemess, and that mode this, of bringing it out of the
rock. (219.) St. Paul, as I have observed, 1 Cor. x. 4, argues
that the contemporaries of the Exodus did all drink the same
spiritual drink — because they did aU drink of the spiritual
rock which foUowed them, (or, as it would be more strictly
rendered, of'a spiritual following rock,) which rock was the
Christ. And though this is figurative language, yet as even
figure and metaphor must have some literal truth to rest
upon, what matter of fact could have been the foundation of
the metaphor in this instance, except that the water, of which
the Israelites did literally drink in the wilderness all along,
was literally brought out of the Rock ? Or what other fact
eould have been the foundation of the Jewish Tradition, that
the Rock, which gave out its water for their use first at Re
phidim or Massah, followed them ever after, rendering them
the same service perpetually? We are not bound to accept
this tradition literally ; and yet we may argue from it that
the recognised mode of the supply of water in the wilderness.

150 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xviii.
handed down among the Jews, must have been this, of bring
ing it out of the Rock; and that Rock too, we may also
believe, on the testimony of St. Paul, always intended as a
type and symbol of the true spiritual Rock — the Dispenser of
the Waters of Life and Salvation to all Believers, Jesus the
Christ. (220.) And this conclusion, it appears to me, is strongly
confirmed by the account of the second supply in this way,
which has been left on record, at the second Meribah, and in
the last year of the Exodus, as the other was in the first, just
referred to. For before any thing had yet been said of the
peculiar mode in which the water was to be supplied on this
occasion, or any the least intimation given of its being in
tended to come out of the Rock, the Loed, Num. xx. 8, said
to Moses : " Take the rod, and gather thou the assembly
together, thou, and Aaron thy brother, and speak ye unto the
Rock before their eyes ; and it shall give forth His water, and
thou shalt bring forth to them water out of the Rock." There
was then some Rock, already designated to that use, and
some water, contained in it, destined to come out of it, before
any murmuring of the people, at the want of that water,
had yet been heard, or any steps taken, as if in consequence of
those murmurs, to supply it. Cf. vers. lo, ii.
(221.) This however being assumed as the standing mode
of providing for this particular want, the encampments of the
Israelites, it is to be presumed, would be regulated by a pro
spective regard, which no conductor but God could have
exerted perpetually, to those locaUties, where Rocks, proper to
become the subjects or instruments of this oeconomy, might
always be found — -though whether such waters were naturaUy
contained in those rocks, or were created, and made to come
out of them for the occasion — every one is at Uberty to judge
for himself. It is no objection to these explanations, that
two eases only of the actual provision of water in this way are
on record, the first at Rephidim, Exod. xvii. 1-7, in the first
year of the Exodus, the waters of Massah, (Num. xxxUi. 14,)
the second, in the last year, at the waters of Meribah- Kadesh,
Num. XX. 3-13. It appears from Deut. viii. 3, 3, 15, 16,
that there were times and occasions when God purposely
suffered the people both to hunger and to thirst — ^in order to

QUEST. XIX.] Population of the Land of Canaan. 151
humble them by a sense of their constant dependence for their
very subsistence on something beyond themselves, and to put
to the proof their absolute trust in himself. Those waters of
Massah, and these waters of Meribah, the one at the very
beginning, the other at the very end, of the miraculous
eeconomy of this kind, evidently belong to this category of
exceptional cases, and might have been purposely left on
record in Ulustration and confirmation of Deut. viii. 3, 3, 15.1
16, itself*.

Question XIX. — The Numlers of the Israelites, compared with
the Extent of the Land of Canaan.
(Colenso, ch. xiu. pp. 83, 83.)

(222.) It is not easy to see the precise drift of this chapter,
which raises a double question, one Whether Judsea, by means
of the population which must have been settled in it at the
* Dr. Colenso (44, 85, vii. 88) insists strongly on the difficulty, under
which the Israehtes must have laboured perpetually during their sojourn
in the Desert, of procuring fuel for various necessary purposes. It does not
seem to have occurred to him to reflect that the same diflBculty, in the case of
the inhabitants of the same deserts, must exist at present, and probably
to a much greater degree at present, than at the time of the Exodus, so
far at least as concems any natural supplies of that kind which the desert
itself is capable of furnishing — and yet that the inhabitants of the desert
at the present day are conscious of no great privation in that respect. The
truth is, they find a simple and never-failing supply of all the fuel which
they require, in the dung of their own cattle, especially their oxen and
their camels.
That cows' dung was wont to be used in these quarters, even for
culinary purposes, at a very remote period, appears from Ezek. iv. 15.
Nor can there be any doubt, that when dried and hardened by exposure to
the burmng suns of the east, almost at any time of the year, it is extremely
well adapted to serve for fuel ; and being simply the nepiTTana or superflu
ous part of the natural food of graminivorous animals, it has nothing par
ticularly disagreeable or offensive about it. Of fiiel of this description, the
flocks and herds of the Israelites, (particulariy on Dr. Colenso's calcula
tion of their, numbers,) would furnish a never-failing supply, as long as it
was wanted.

152 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xix.
Eisodus, was not adequately replenished with inhabitants;
the other, if it was. Whether its inhabitants could have been
in any danger from the inroads of beasts of prey — and con
sequently, (what seems to have been the object of these ques
tions from the first,) Whether it was not a very superfluous
announcement to be made, as if from the mouth of God
himself, in the texts premised to this chapter; to the first
settlers in the country, Exod. xxui. 37-30, (cf. Deut. vii. 33,)
that he would not drive out its former possessors from before
them aU at onee, lest the Beasts of the Field should increase
upon them.
(223.) Now, with respect to the first of these questions, a
country is adequately peopled at a given time, when it con
tains within its limits, at that time, the utmost amount of in
habitants which it is physicaUy competent to maintain. The
numbers, which the land of Canaan received- at the Eisodus,
according to Dr. Colenso (93), were 3,000,000; according to
my own calculation (96) including the Le-vites, as weU as the
rest ofthe Tribes, of both sexes and of all ages, were 1,340,193 ;
and even these, however considerable at first sight in them
selves, could not have been sufficient to people an area of
11,000 square miles, 7,000,000 acres, according to Dr.
Colenso (91), in extent; much less to the utmost amount of
what it was capable of receiving and maintaining. The
productive capabUities of the land of Promise, — ^the land set
apart by the Creator himself at the Creation, as the future
habitation of his Church and People — the land which even after
the FaU, and after the Deluge, was stiU more or less the heir
of the pri-vUeges and distinctions assigned at the beginning of
things to the Garden of Eden ^ — the land which he himself*
calls the glory of aU lands — ^the land which he had repeatedly
pledged himself to bless and to render fertUe, in a special
degree — ^the capabilities of such a land as this — ^notwithstand
ing what Dr. Colenso is pleased to insinuate (169, pag. 143 n)
of parts of it — are not to be measured by the ordinary
standard of the proportion of the number of its inhabitants
at a given time to its geographical 01- superficial extent.
" See my Three Witnesses, 61. ' Ezekiel xx. 6, 15 : cf. Deut. xi. 12 :
Dan. viii. 9, xi. 16-41 : Zechariah vii. 14.

QUEST. XIX.] Population of the Land of Canaan. 153
(224.) With respect however to this question, of its actual
Population, at different times, from the Eisodus downwards, I
had occasion to consider it in my Dissertations on the
Principles and Arrangement of an Harmony of the Gospels ;
and for the particular results of that inquiry I would beg to
refer the reader to that work u. It is sufficient at present to
observe that, in the reign of Da-vid, (circ. B. C. 1018-1017,)
the entu-e population, exclusive of Benjamin and Levi, (four
times that of the fighting men,) amounted to 6,380,000 ; and
in the reign of Jehoshaphat, (circ. B. C. 911,) two Tribes only,
Judah and Benjamin, supplied a total of 4,640,000.
(225.) Dr. Colenso indeed is in the habit of throwing dis
credit on aU the numerical statements of this kind, in the
©Id Testament history ; but what will he say to the assertion
of Josephus? that, in his time, in GaUlee alone, while no
towm in that part of Judaea contained less than 15,000
inhabitants^, there were 304 such towns or K&ixai'y — on
which supposition GalUee alone must have had a population
of 3,060,000 souls : and Galilee not having been more than a
third part of all Judaea, east and west of the Jordan, the
whole country, if peopled in the same proportion, must have
contained 9,000,000 of souls. Or what -will he say to the
statement of Dio Cassius ^ ? that in the War of Adrian, 985
K&jxai ovoiiacTTOTaTai., as he terms them, were laid waste by the
Romans. These too, if peopled in any thing like the same
proportion as the k&ij.m of GaUlee, according to Josephus,
must have contained an aggregate of nine or ten millions at
leas-t — and that too only seventy years after the desolation
produced by the war of Nero and Vespasian, A. D. 66—75^.
(226.) Make what aUowance we may for possible exaggera
tions of the matter of faet, in the above statements, stiU, in
the face of such testimonies, no one could think of denying
that Judsea, in its proper geographical extent, as the repre
sentative of the Land of Promise, must have been competent
to contain an ordinary population of five or six millions at
least, and therefore could never be considered adequately
peopled by the numbers received into it at the Eisodus ;

" iv. 486-507. " Bellum, iii. iii. z. y Vita, 45. z Ixix. 14.
» See my Dissert, iv. 98-116.

154 Historical Character of the Pentateuch. [quest, xix.
scarcely a fourth of that amount. And this brings us to the
second question, raised in this chapter of Dr. Colenso's;
Whether a population, as yet scarcely a fourth of the ordi
nary population of such a country, put into possession of it
as entirely deprived of its former inhabitants, would or would
not be in danger from the increase of beasts of prey — before
they could yet have filled the country.
(227.) The answer to this question is simply the proper
answer to a question of fact — Whether Judaea itself, even in
the most settled and populous times, was Uable to be infested
by beasts of prey ; for if it was, much more must it have been
so, under such circumstances as those of the Eisodus — -with a
population as yet scarcely equal to one fourth of its proper
amount. And that it must have been so liable even in the
most settled and populous times, may be inferred first from
the number of allusions to wild beasts of the most formidable
kind — especially the lion and the bear — and the various
images taken from their instincts and habits, which occur
in the poetical parts of the Old Testament. Secondly, from
the frequent occasions, recorded in Scripture, when one or the
other of these two in particular, (especially the lion,) acts an
historical part — as for example, the young lion of Samson iJ,
the lion and the bear of David ", the Uon of Benaiah'', the lion
of the prophet of Bethel «, the lion of Micaiah f, the she-bears
of Elishas. And though in some of these instances both
those animals may have acted merely as instmments to fulfil
certain penal purposes of the Di-vine Providence, that makes
no difference to the present question, unless it should be con
tended that the animals so employed were created for the
purpose. (228.) That the lion was known to lurk in the coverts of
the Jordan, and was liable to be driven out thence into the
open country by the annual overfiowing of the river, appears
from Jeremiah xlix. 19, 1. 44. But on this question of the
liability of Judaea in particular, if desolated of inhabitants, or
only imperfectly peopled, to be infested by beasts of prey, the
most apposite example to which we could appeal is 3 Kings
^ Judg. xiv. 5, 6. c I Sam. xvii. 34-37. d 2 Sam. x.-siii. 20 :
1 Chron. xi. 1^. e 1 Kings xiii. 24-28. f i Kings -sx. 36.
B 2 Kings ii. 24.

QUEST. XX.] Rites, and Gelelration, qf the Passover. 155
x-vii. 35, 36 — from which we see that the country of the Ten
Tribes, recently denuded of its proper inhabitants, and as
yet very inadequately replenished by the settlers transplanted
thither from Upper Asia — was actually exposed to this very
plague of the increase of the beasts of the field on the inha
bitants of the land, and that too in the shape of lions. And
though this also is represented as a Providential eeconomy,
designed to bring these new inhabitants of the kingdom of
the Ten Tribes to a knowledge of " the God of the Land,"
that, as I have already observed, makes no difference to the
question whether Judsea was liable to the inroads of beasts of
prey — and those of the most formidable kind — when no longer
restrained and kept -within bounds by its own population —
unless these lions too in the time of Shalmanezer were created
on purpose, for the part which they are seen to have performed,
in furthering the designs of Pro-vidence -with respect to the
successors of the Ten Tribes.

Question XX. — The Priesfs, and their Duties at the Celebration
of the Passover.
(Colenso, ch. xxi. pp. 131-138.)

(229.) It is assumed in this chapter that, according to the
rule of the Paschal ritual from the first, if it was not the duty
of the Priests to sacrifice the Paschal victims in behalf of the
people, it was at least their duty to receive the blood of the
victims so sacrificed by the people for themselves, in the court
of the Tabernacle, and to offer it there on the altar, in their
stead. And taking this assumption -with him to the con
sideration of the first memorial-Passover, Numbers ix. 5,
and calculating the number of victims, the blood of which
would have to pass, on this occasion, through the hands of
the Priests, at 150,000, and the number of Priests through
whose hands it would have to pass, (Aaron and his two sons,
Eleazar and Ithamar,) and the utmost length of time allowed
it for so passing, (two hours at most,) Dr. Colenso (161) has

156 Historical Character of the Pentateuch. [quest, xx.
little difficulty in coming to the conclusion that it was impos
sible that the blood of so many victims could have passed
through the hands of so few ministering Priests -within the
time prescribed.
(230.) We need not object to this reasoning that as the
numbers of the entire population at this time did not exceed
1,340,000, the number of victims required for this occasion,
at the rate of one to every fifteen souls, could not have ex
ceeded 90,000. I am ready to admit that the blood of every
one even of these could not reasonably be supposed capable of
passing through the hands of three individuals only in the
space of two hours. The question, on which I propose to join
issue with Dr. Colenso, is this. Whether it was in reaUty part '
of the Paschal rule, and Paschal ritual, from the first, that the
blood of the Paschal victims should pass through the hands of
the Priests, or even that the Priests should have any thing to
do with the Paschal sacrifices of the people at aU.
(231.) Numb. ix. i : We read, "And the Loed spake unto
Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the first month of the
second year, (either the solar Abib, March 37 — April 36, or
the lunar, March 39 — April 38,) after they were come out of
the land of Egypt, saying, ver. 3, Let the children of Israel
also keep the Passover at his appointed season, ver. 3, In
the fourteenth day of this month, at even, (marg. letween
the two evenings^ ye shall keep it in his appointed season :
according to all the rites of it, and according to all the
ceremonies thereof, shall ye keep it." Such was the in
junction, commanding the observance of the first memorial
Passover : and of the way in which it was obeyed, we read
as foUows : ver. 4, " And Moses spake unto the chUdren of
Israel, that they should keep the Passover, ver. 5, And they
kept the Passover on the fourteenth day of the first month
at even, (either the fourteenth of the solar Abib, AprU 9, or
the fourteenth of the lunar, April 11,) in the -wilderness of
Sinai : according to all that the Lord commanded Moses, so
did the chUdren of Israel."
(232.) The above is all, which is extant in Scripture, of the
circumstances of this Passover, unless it be what foUows'^, con
cerning the Passover of the second month, the institution of
I" Numb. ix. 6-14.

quest. XX.] Rites, and Celebration, of the Passover. 157
whieh, humanly speaking, arose accidentally out of this me
morial one in the first month. It is evident, from the former
part of this account, that, -with respect to the rule of this
Passover, nothing was prescribed in terms but the time, the
fourteenth of the first month ; all the rest was generally
exprest, according to all the rites, and according to all the
ceremonies, thereof — and that must necessarily have implied
that it both had, and was known to have, certain prescribed
rites and ceremonies, which there was no necessity to specify
afresh for this particular occasion. If so, to know what these
were, or would at this time be understood to be, we must
begin with tracing the history of this observance, from its
first institution, down to the present time.
(233.) Now the institution of the Passover, as every one
must be aware, is found on record Exod. xii. 3-14, 15-20,
31, 33, 34 (fourteen days, as I shewed supra (131 sqq.), before
the Exodus, partly in the words of the Lord to Moses, partly
in those of Moses, repeating to the people what he had him
self just received in charge from the Lord. There is a second
allusion to it in the same chapter, xii. 43—49, which comes in
after the account of the first Passover, and after the account
of the Exodus, in the words of God himself to Moses, laying
down and prescribing its rule as an ordinance, afresh, which
it may be presumed was intended to be supplementary to
xii. 14 in the account of the fiLrst institution. There is a
third, the date of which would seem to have been the day of
the Exodus also, Abib 15, April 10, (cf. xiii. 3, 4,) yet as
arising out of the injunction, relating to the firstborn just
recorded, xiii. 3 ; and in the words of Moses to the people,
explanatory of that injunction, xiU. 3-10. And these are all
the allusions to this particular observance, and its rule or
ritual, which occur in the history before the delivery of any
part of the Law.
(234.) With respect to those which occur between the
delivery of the Law and Numb. ix. 5, the first is Exodus
xxiii. 15, the next xxxiv. 18, 35, the next Levit. xxiii. 5-8.
Laying then all these references to one and the same observ
ance, and all these specifications of its proper rule and
ritual, together, we shaU see that none of the later ones (Exod.
xxiu. 15, xxxiv. 18, 35, Levit. xxiii. 5-8) adds any thing to

158 Historical Chofi-acter of the Pentateuch. [quest, xx.
the particulars specified in all their circumstantiaUty in the
very first injunction of the same kind, Exod. xu. 3-14, 15-
30, 31, 33, 34, except the sequel of Le-vit. xxin. 9-14, which
prescribes, for the first time, the offering of the wave sheaf,
or firstfruits of barley harvest, -with its accompanying sacri
fices, on the morrow after the sabbath, the morrow after the
first day of the feast of unleavened bread, Abib i^ — ^yet, with
this important qualification, that, even as an additional cir
cumstance of the ritual of the same occasion, it was not to be
observed until the people should have come into the land
which the Lord should give them.
(235.) The only recognised and authoritative standard then
of the ritual of the Passover, between its first institution and
Numb. ix. 5, must stiU have been the first injunction of that
kind, Exod. xU. 3-14, 15-30, 31, 33, 34, 43-49; xiu. 3-10.
And if we extend our survey of the history of this observance
to the end of the Pentateuch itself, we shaU find nothing on
record, between Numb. ix. 5 and the last page of Deutero
nomy, bearing on this question, except Numb, xxviu. 16-35,
and Deut. xvi. 1-8, both belonging to the last year of the
Exodus ; nor any thing added to the ritual of the ordinance by
either, except the particular sacrifices for each of the seven
days of the Azyma, by the former, and the particular locality
where the Passover itself was always to be observed, (but only
after the settlement of the people in the land of their inhe
ritance,) by the latter — ^neither of whieh could have any thing
to do -with the rule of the observance at first, or still, in the
second year of the sojoum in the wUderness.
(236.) The above review therefore of the history of this
institution, and of the ordinances relating to it, must satisfy
an enquirer into this question, that to know what could have
been supposed its proper rule and ritual. Numb. ix. i, he must
go back to Exod. xii. And here, the first thing which it
may occur to him to remark is, that he finds there a double
prescription of the ritual of the observance, one much more
particular than the other, Exod. xii. 3-14, 15-30, 3i, 33, (cf.
also xiii. 3-10) — the other more concise indeed, yet substan
tially to the same effect, xii. 43-49. But it will probably
also occur to him to remark, that the former was prescribed
before the Exodus, and preliminary to it, the latter, for any

quest. xx.J Rites, and Celebration, qf the Passover. 159
thing which appears to the contrary, as I observed supra (333),
might have been intended as supplementary to the former,
and explanatory of it, whether delivered after the Exodus, or
before it.
(237.) It may occur to him also to observe that, among
the ceremonies enjoined on that first occasion, some there
were which the reason of things would imply to have had a
special reference to the circumstances of that first celebration ;
and unless such circumstances should be supposed capable of
occurring again, could not have been intended for perpetuity.
Such, for instance, was the injunction, Exod. xii. 11 : " And
thus shaU ye eat it ; with your loins girded, your shoes on
your feet, and your staff in your hand ; and ye shall eat it in
haste :" — and the reason assigned for that injunction, " It is
the Lord's Passover, ver. 13, For I wUl pass through the land
of Egypt this night." For this was a description of the atti
tude of travellers, ready equipped for a joumey, and expect
ing every moment a summons to set out — literaUy applicable
to the case of the observers of the first Passover, who had
scarce had time to finish their first Paschal meal, before they
were thrust out in haste, xu. 39'. Such also it may be pre
sumed was the injunction, xii. 33 : " And none of you shall
go out at the door of his house until the morning." Such
too must have been the injunction, Exod. xii. 7, 13, 33, 33,
relating to the use which was to be made of the blood of the
victims in this first Passover, in part, if not altogether; viz.
in sprinkling the outsides of the doors of their houses : at
least, if the state of the case which necessitated this use of
the blood on that first occasion could never again be matter
of fact on any future occasion.
(238.) On this principle the real prescriptive ritual and
ceremonial of the Paschal ordinance in all its integrity and aU
its distinctness — even as laid down on this first occasion, yet
as intended to be of perpetual obligation — must have been
Exod. xii. 3-6: 8-10: 14-17: 18-30: 34, (fourteen days
before the Exodus,) on the one hand, and xii. 43-49 — ^the
same repeated, (possibly on the day of the Exodus,) on the
other — as regarded the children of Israel, simply with the
omission of such particulars as -s^ere peculiar to the first Pass-
' Cf xii. 33, vi. I : xi. 1.

160 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xx.
over, and as regarded any one else, simply with the addition
of the terms on which the stranger, and his household also,
should be pri-vileged to partake of it along with them.
(239.) And this being the case, the substance of every pre
scription, intended to be of perpetual obUgation, for this par
ticular observance, and enjoined in both these passages, -with
that view, beforehand, may be summed up as follows :
i. That no uncircumcised person, whether born in the land,
or a stranger, should be permitted to partake of it. ii. That
all the congregation without exception should take part in it.
iii. That the mode in which they should do so, shoidd be by
households or Paschal companies, iv. That each Paschal
company should have its own Paschal -victim, v. That these
Paschal victims should be lambs or kids, males, of the first
year. -vi. That they should be taken up and designated for
the Paschal Sacrifice on the tenth of the Paschal month ; four
days before they were sacrificed, vii. That aU should be
sacrificed at one time, each for its proper company; and that
time the fourteenth of the Paschal month, between the two
evenings, viii. That the victims, so sacrificed, should be pre
pared to be eaten by being roasted with fire, and prepared
entire, and eaten entire ; and with unleavened bread and bitter
herbs : and in the same house, and before morning — or if
ought remained uneaten till the morning, it should be bui-nt.
And this is all in both those passages, which can be said to
concem the ordinance of the Passover, and the rule of its ob
servance, as such. What follows in the first in particular,
xii. 15-30, concerns the Feast of unleavened Bread, the or
dinance of the Azyma, not that of the Passover.
(240.) Such then having been the ritual, and sueh the
ceremonial, of the Passover, both as adapted at first to the
accidental circumstances of the Pascha jEgyptiacum, and as
modified immediately after, and adapted for perpetuity, what
could have been ' the rites thereof,' and what ' the ceremonies
thereof,' according to which it was both commanded and ex
pected to be observed, on the very next occasion of its cele
bration. Numb. ix. 1-5, but these ? Could this have been the
rule prescribed the year before, and yet not be the rule in
force the year after ? And,, among these prescribed rules of
the observance both at first, and for the future, what injunc-

QUEST. XX.] Rites, and Celebration, of fhe Passover. 161
tion was more prominent and more express beforehand than
this. That every householder should take up a lamb for him
self and his house. That every house and its family should
count for one lamb ? or, at the time of the sacrifice, than this.
That the whole congregation should kUl these lambs at the
same time, between the evenings ? But kill them by whom ?
By the Priests, or by themselves ? And how could it have
been, in this first instance, by the Priests, in the legal accep
tation of the term, when there were as yet none such ? And
how could the entire congregation, as a body, kill all these
lambs themselves, at one and the same time, unless every
householder, and every head of a family, among them, was
killing his own particular victim for himself and his family,
at once ?
(241.) That the first Paschal Sacrifices then must have been
offered by individual householders, acting as their own Priests,
there can be little question; and if the first could be so
offered, or rather must have been, while yet there was no
Levitical Priesthood, why might not the second, or rather why
must not the seeond, though there was then a Levitical Priest
hood, if the rites and ceremonies of the second were not to
differ from those of the first ? and if the reasons, which re
quired indi-vidual householders to officiate as their own Priests,
on the first occasion, did just as strongly and as peremptorily
require them to do so on the second ?
(242.) On such a question as this, which concerns the rule
de facto of the very first memorial-Passover, the very second
Passover which was ever celebrated, it is an varepov -nporepov of
the most unreasonable kind, to refer to any Passovers of later
date; especially such as those of Hezekiah, or Josiah — to
which Dr. Colenso has appealed, as to cases in point (159) : as
if the lapse of a thousand years, and the constant tendency of
a ceremonial system like the Levitical, to assimilate to its own
peculiar ritual even an institution which, though originally
prior to, and independent of, itself, had yet been incorporated
in it, from the first — could have superinduced no novelty on
the proper Paschal rule, as laid down at first. Though as to
these two Passovers, in particular, (that of Hezekiah, B. C.
734', and that of Josiah i', B. C. 633,) and with respect to the
i 2 Chron. xxx. 15-20. •' 2 Kings xxiii. 21-23 : 2 Chron. xxxv. 1-19.
M

162 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xx.
evidence, whieh either of them may seem at first sight to
furnish, of any ministerial agency in offering the proper sacri
fices, but that of the people themselves, it would not be diffi-
to shew' that both were exceptional cases of their kind, and
neither of them was any criterion of the true Paschal ritual
even then, much less from the first.
(243.) But, as I have just intimated, there was something
in the Paschal Institution and Paschal Sacrifice, in contra
distinction to the Levitical Institutions and Sacrifices in
general, which was only consistent with such a difference
between them from the first as this. That while the Levitical
Sacrifices could be offered through no ministerial agency but
that of the Levitical Priesthood, the Paschal Sacrifice might
be, or rather must be, offered by the people in general for
themselves ; i. e. by each individual master of a famUy for him
self and his family in particular. There were three positive
institutions, each of them incorporated in the Law, yet
each of them older than the Law, and consequently in its
origin independent of the Law — The consecration of the
Seventh Day, The rite of Circumcision, and This institution of
the Passover. The religious sanctity of the seventh day was
as old as the Creation, the rest of the seventh day was first
enjoined by the Law. Circumcision, as our Sa-viour told the
Jews™, though enjoined or required by Moses, was not of
Moses, but ofthe Fathers ; and as St. Paul tells the Romans",
as first instituted, was intended as the sign not of legal and
ceremonial righteousness, but of the righteousness which is by
Faith. The Paschal institution was sixty-five days at least
older than the delivery of any part of the Law.
(244.) Now St.Paul has taught us';, with respect to the
Law, as a covenant of Works in contradistinction to the cove
nant of Grace, 430 years older than itself, that it was alto
gether a Parenthetic Dispensation, expressly interposed between
the Promise to Abraham and its Fulfilment, to answer a very
necessary end and purpose, preliminary and subservient to the
due effect even of the covenant of Grace itself. It is con
ceivable then that there might have been no such intermediate
Dispensation, between the Exodus and the birth of the Pro-
' Cf. my Dissertations on the Princijiles, &c., iii. 147 «. m John vii. 2-;.
" lv. II. " Galat. iii. 17-20.

QUEST. XX.] Rites, and Celebration, of the Passover. 163
mised Seed, as that of the Law. But is it conceivable that
there could have been the Exodus from Egypt — such as we
read of in the Bible — without the Paschal Institution and
Paschal Sacrifice, critically subservient to the deliverance of
the people of God from their Egyptian bondage at first, and
strictly commemorative of it ever after ? And who would be
prepared to consider that possible, who was aware of the
spiritual bondage, the antitype of this Egyptian one, to which
even the people of God, without some deliverance from it, were
naturally subject, and of the true Paschal Sacrifice, typified
by this first Paschal Sacrifice, which was the appointed means
of that deliverance P ?
(245.) The Paschal Institution then, and Paschal Sacrifice,
with this concealed reference from the first to the great Chris
tian Sacrifice, and to the deliverance from a worse than Egyp
tian bondage, thereby destined to be effected in behalf of the
people of God, we may well be permitted to believe would
have been necessary, even had there been no Law ; and if a
Paschal Sacrifice, a Paschal Priesthood — which, under such
circumstances, eould have been nothing but that of every
father of a family among the people of God, for himself and
his o-wn household. This was the true essential distinction
between the Paschal Sacrifice and the Le-vitical Sacrifices,
that the former was prior to the latter in eoming into being,
and founded in reasons prior to and independent of the Law ;
the former pointed from the first to ends and purposes, effects
and consequences, either not contemplated, or not attainable,
by the latter. And such was the difference between the Pas
chal Priesthood and the Levitical Priesthood, that the former
was a National Priesthood, the latter was a Family, or at the
most a Tribal, one.
(246.) Nor even down to the time when the Paschal Sacri
fice itself found its fuU and entire consummation in the sacri
fice of the Cross, and the Paschal Institution, as a memorial
rite and observance, its proper antitype in the Christian
Eucharist, is there any proof extant any where, that it ever
lost this original characteristic distinction of being eminently
the one sacrificial act of a National Priesthood. Nothing is
p Cf. my Three -Witnesses, ch. i. sect. xi. pp. 89-98.
M 3

164 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xx.
on record in the later history of the Old Testament, or in
Josephus, to imply, directly or indirectly, that for this one
service even under the Law the ministerial agency of the
Nation for itself, through its particular heads of famUies,
was not sufficient, without the instrumentality of the Aaro
nical Priesthood; while as to the contrary, we have the
positive testimony of a contemporary of the Apostles, speak
ing from repeated experience and observation of his o-wn — ^the
most learned Jew of his time, Philo- Judseus — so express to the
point, that I think it wiU be considered decisive even by Dr.
Colenso — and so little liable to be misunderstood, that it will
suffice simply to produce it, translated into English, as closely
to the original as possible, but without note or comment of
any kind.
i. Philo- Jud., Opp. ii. p. 169, 1. 16-34; ^^ Mose iii. Edit.
Mangeyq. "In this month then, about the fourteenth day,
the lunar circle being on the point of becoming full of light,
are kept the Over-passings, a feast at which the Congregation
appears, the thing which in Chaldee is called Pascha (Pass
over) — in which {feast) the common people indeed do not
bring the victims to the altar, and the Priests sacrifice them,
but by injunction of Law the nation all together acts as Priest
for itself; each of them in particular at that time bringing up,
and with his own hands operating upon, the sacrifices in
behalf of himself."
ii. Ibid. ii. 306, 16-33, De Decem Oraculis: "And that {feast)
which Hebrews in their father tongue term Pascha (Passover)
— in which they sacrifice each of them throughout the Con
gregation, not waiting for their Priests — ^the Law having
freely granted a Priesthood to aU the nation for one day in
particular every year, in order to an operation of sacrifices
through themselves."
iii. Ibid. ii. 393, 1. 16-44, De Septenario et Festis Diebus :
" But after the new moon is a fourth feast, the Over-passings
which the Hebrews call Pascha (Passover); in which they
sacrifice through all the Congregation, having made a be
ginning at midday, until evening  not waiting for Priests.
And that which was then done, (i. e. at the time of the first
<1 Cf my Dissertations on the Principles and Arrangement of an Harmony
of the Gospels, iii. 146.

QUEST. XXI.] Provision for Ihe Priests. 165
Passover^ the Law hath given leave to do once for all, everv
year, to remind th.em of the duty of gratitude  And every
house at that time is clothed round about with the habit and
solemnity of a temple, whUe the victim which has been slain
is being got ready for the suitable kind of good cheer, and
those, who have been collected for the different common
meals, have been purified with sprinkling instruments adapted
to cleansing. And these guests, such as have come for the
occasion, not as to the other kinds of drinkings-together,
in order to gratify a belly through wine and meats, but in
order to fulfil to the letter, with both prayer and hymns,
an usage derived- from their fathers. And the sacrifice, thus
common to all the Congregation, is kept on the fourteenth
of the month."

Question XXI. — The Numler of Priests at the Exodus, com
pared with their Duties, and the Provision made for them.
(Colenso, ch. xx. pp. 133—130.)

(247.) With respect to the difficulties raised under these
heads, it is to be observed, that there was a class of offerings
under the Law, called, by way of distinction. Holy ; and as
such, required to be eaten by the ministering Priests, the same
day on which they were offered, in the Holy Place, or in the
fore part of the Tabernacle or Naos itself (supra 31, 34). And
assuming that this injunction was intended from the first to
apply to the state of things in the wilderness, when the num
ber of ministering Priests was still limited to Aaron, and his
sons Eleazar and Ithamar, Dr. Colenso objects. That in various
instances, these offerings must have been so numerous, that
it must have been physically impossible for three individuals
only to have eaten them in the time prescribed. But, to
admit for the present the truth of the assumption on which
this difficulty is founded, (of which more, by and by,) the ob
jection overlooks an important qualification, with which this
injunction is accompanied in some of these instances ; and

166 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xxi.
which, whether specially mentioned in others or not, yet from
the reason of things, from the analogy of parallel circumstances,
and from the applicability of the principle of the exception
as much to all such cases in general, as to any one of them
in particular, must be understood to accompany the rest, -viz.
That if this particular class of sacrifices could not be eaten by
those whose duty it was to eat them in one day, — if aught of
them remained until the morning — it should be bumtq.
(248.) Dr. Colenso fui-ther objects that the standing provi
sion made for the maintenance of the sacerdotal Family in
particular, (the various items of which he has minutely enu
merated (154, 155),) was out of all proportion to its possible
wants at this time, when it consisted of three indi-viduals only,
and their respective families. But what an objection is that^
to be seriously urged as an argument of the unhistorical cha
racter of aU these proceedings and all these regulations, which
are related in the Pentateuch ? as if the Law as such could
possibly have limited its prospective provision for the neces
sary support of the ministerial orders of its own appomtment,
the Priests and the Levites, to the scale of their wants at the
time when the Law itself was promulgated, and not have
extended its -view to the future exigencies of 1630 years to
come, the actual interval between the Exodus, B.C. 1560, and
the dissolution of the Jewish Polity both in Church and State,
A.D. 70.
(249.) That the ordinances relating to the Priests and their
portions did not contemplate simply the supply of existing
wants, but looked forward to those of a stUl distant future,
may be inferred from Lev. vii. 0^6 (cf. xxv. 33-34). And how
ever considerable the provision made for the temporal needs
of the two ministering orders, the Priests and the Levites,
may appear to have been at first, no one can read the later
Books of the Old Testament, or the Antiquities, and the
War, of Josephus, and not see reason repeatedly to conclude
that ample as it might seem to have been original^, in the
course of time, and in the practical application of this pai-t of
the injunctions of the Law pei-petually, it must often have
been found barely sufficient for its purpose.
'1 .See Exoil. xxix. 34, and cf. Levit. vii. 15-17, viii. 32, xix. 5-7.

QUEST. XXI.] Provlvou for the Priests. 167
(250.) Dr. Colenso appears to argue on this particular
question, as if he thought the Priests as such, the lineal
descendants of Aaron, always constituted a mere handful of
individuals, in comparison of the rest of the nation, as they
must certainly have done at first ; and he intimates a doubt
of the authenticity or the credibility of those parts of Scrip
ture (158, p. 130), which would have opened his eyes to a
very different estimate of the state of the case in that respect,
in the reigns of David and Solomon at leasts. But what will
he say to the statement of Josephus s, (himself a Priest, and
of the course of Joarib,) that the number of the Priests in his
time was not less than 30,000, males, and grown up ? which,
including males and females, of all ages, belonging to their
families also, must have implied a total of 80,000 at least, if
not of 130,000. And that this was no exaggeration of the
actual state of the case in his time, may be inferred from a
variety of allusions to the Priests as such, whicii occur obiter
in the War, and in the later Books of the Antiquities, and
witiiout intending any such impression, are calculated to con
vey a very high idea of their actual number.
(251.) It appears also to Dr. Colenso a very extraordinary,
and even suspicious circumstance, that to these two, or at the
utmost three, representatives of the sacerdotal order, Eleazar,
Ithamar, and Phinehas, at the time of the division of the
Land', Thirteen cities and their suburbs should have been
assign e_d, 'And all,' he observes {1^%),' in the immediate neigh
bourhood of Jerusalem, where the Temple was built, and where
the presence of the Priests was especially required, but in a
later age.' This objection, as far as concerns the apparent
excess of the standing provision for a particular want above
the immediate need, has been anticipated (348). These cities
and their suburbs, whether all required by the Priests and
their FamUies, at first, or not, would come to be required by
their descendants in the course of time, and would then be
found to be no more than enough for them. And even at
this time, what was there in the nature of the case, why these
cities, with their proper sites, and their proper Umits and
boundaries round about them, should not have been made
r I Chron. xxiii-xxvi. = Contra Apion. ii. 8. p. 1245. edit. Oberthiii-.
t Joshua xxi. 13-19 ; i Chron. vi. 57-60.

168 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xxi.
over to the representatives of the Priesthood, whether more
or fewer, for the time being, as the right and property of
their order at least for ever ? And why should not even three
Families, with their respective component parts and members,
including among them very possibly an hundred or two of
souls, be as competent at this time to occupy thirteen cities as
the six hundred Benjamites, the only survivors of their Tribe,
after the civil war, in a subsequent time, to reoccupy the
vacant cities oftheir own Tribe", twice as numerous as these
thirteen cities ofthe Priests" ?
(252.) And as to the particular coincidence, which to the
eye of Dr. Colenso looks so suspicious, that all these cities of
the Priests should have lien in the tribe of Judah or Ben
jamin, and in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem ; it may well
appear strange to my reader, as it does to me, that the prin
cipal reason for suspecting the historical character of these
accounts, in the opinion of Dr. Colenso, should have been
that one of their circumstances in which every commentator
on them hitherto has discovered the most remarkable internal
evidence of their truth, in the proof thus brought to light of
the wonderful Providence which directed all these arrange
ments from the first ; and knowing even then that the time
would arrive when Jerusalem should become the centre both
of the civil government and of the national worship, of its
own people, yet foreseeing also the separation of the Ten
Tribes from the Two, and the division of the kingdom of
Israel from the kingdom of Judah, and along with that the
introduction of an idolatrous worship in the kingdom of
Israel, in opposition of the worship of its own establishing
at Jerusalem — foreseeing all this, provided so long before
against such a contingency as the defection of its own
ministers in particular, by causing the lot of their inherit
ance to fall within the limits of the kingdom of Judah, and
in the immediate neighbourhood of Jerusalem, where they
would be in no danger either of being constrained by the
power of the kings of Israel, against their will, or of being
seduced by the example of their too sequacious subjects, with
their own consent, to join in the common idolatry.
(253.) But the true answer to all such difficulties and
» Judges XX. 47 ; xxl. 12-14, 20-23 i ^^ 48- " Joshua xviii. 1 1-28.

quest. xxi.J Provision for the Priests. 169
objections as are brought forward in so exaggerated a form,
in these two chapters, the xxth and xxist of Dr. Colenso's Ex
amination, in my opinion is this. That, unless the whole of
the Law, (or the whole of what Dr. Colenso, p. 1 33, x, terms
the sacrificial system,) as laid down and prescribed in the
Books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, was intended to
come into operation as soon as delivered, and where it was
delivered — they have no foundation to rest upon. And this
is simply a question oi fact, on which I do not hesitate to
join issue -with him.
(254.) In explanation of this subject, I begin with observ
ing that, knowing as we do from the testimony of St. Pauly,
that the Law, as a covenant of Works enforced by the pro
mise of Blessings and Rewards on condition of performance,
and by the denunciation of Penalties and Punishments in case
of non-performance, was, as I styled it supra (344), a Paren
thetic Dispensation, purposely interposed between the proper
date of the covenant of Grace, or Promise, and the proper
time of its fulfilment by the appearance of the Promised Seed,
and purposely intended to subserve the final end of the
covenant of Grace itself, by putting to the test meanwhile
the boasted sufficiency of human nature, to earn its own
acceptance with God, and consequently to work out its own
salvation, irrespectively of Justification by Faith, and Faith
alone — ^that the Law, I say, as the instrumental means of an
experimental process like that, and directed to such a prac
tical proof of the hopelessness of human salvation by any
mode but that of Faith in the Christ, and the free grace of
God, should be digested and promulgated down to the mi
nutest jot and tittle of all its injunctions and requirements,
before such an experiment could begin — I consider too
obvious to require any proof. Nor can there be much doubt
that one of the ends, contemplated by the Deity, in not taking
the people at once from Egypt to the land of Canaan by
the nearest route ^, (whatsoever other reasons there might
have been for it,) must have been this, of conducting them
first to the locality where he intended to announce to them
the Law, in all its fulness and completeness, subject to which
y Gal. iii. 17-20. ^ Exod. xiii. 17, 18.

170 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xxi.
they were to live in the land of Canaan, and which they must
receive before they could be settled there.
(255.) And this being the case, to suppose that the Law so
delivered, and so intended, as a necessary preliminary to this
settlement in Canaan, and to the beginning of the great and
momentous experiment, which must be instituted and tried
there and then only, was designed to be the rule of pubUc
or private life during the sojourn in the Wilderness — is con
futed by its own absurdity. On the contrary, even after the
erection of the Tabernacle, and after the consecration of the
Aaronical Priesthood, it may well be questioned whether any
part of the Ritual and Liturgical system of the Le-vitical Polity
was intended to come into operation, before the settlement
of the Tribes, except perhaps the morning and the evening
sacrifice*, and such of its ceremonies as that of Levit. xvu.
1-7, considered supra (310), which were both the fittest and
the easiest to be observed even during the life in the
wilderness* — though neither of these things is a certain
point. (256.) On this principle, even had no such event as the
rebellion of Kadesh-Barnea occurred when and where it did,
there might stiU have been an interval between the first
promiUgation of the Law of Works, and its first coming into
regular and systematic operation, equal to that between the
Eisodus and the conquest and division of the country — i. e. six
or seven years at least. The rebellion in question, foUo-wing
so closely on the first approach of the people to the promised
land, though foreknown to the Deity, j-et, to aU human
apprehension of the future course of things, having been an
unforeseen contingency ; if in consequence of that the Eisodus
was necessarily to be postponed thirty-eight yeai-s, the in
auguration and instalment of the Law of Works too, within
the sphere of its proper jurisdiction, and in its proper force,
must be postponed for thirty-eight years also — and however
* Add to these the injunctions relating to the plague of leprosy.
Lev. xiii. i-xiv. 32, the uncleanness attaching to which, while it lasted,
must necessarily have entailed exclusion from the congregation and camp,
even in the wilderness — cf. Numb. v. 1-4; though the cases of its actual
occurrence during that state of things in all probability would be very few.
a Exod. xxix. 38-42 : Numb, xxviii. 2-6 sqq.

quest, xxi.] Provision for the Priests. ] 71
complete and perfect in itself — it must lie in abeyance, all
this time, Uttle better in appearance than a dead letter — until
the season of temporary suspense and inactivity should have
come to an end.
(257.) That this is a just representation ofthe state of the
case, with regard to the Law — and its authority, or its ob
servance — for the whole of this interval between the first
arrival of the people on the borders of Canaan in the second
year of the Exodus, and their second, in the last year, may
fairly be inferred, first from Amos v. 35, and Ps. Ixxxi. 13 ; cvi.
36, 37 ; — (confirmed by Acts -vii. 43, 43 also — ) the former,
by itself, leading to the inference that even during the whole of
the forty years' sojourn in the WUderness, no sacrifices of any
kind had been offered to God, by the people ; and along with
the latter, authorising in the way of inference even more than
this — viz. that the people themselves, for the whole of this
interval too, had been given up to their own hearts' lust —
left to follow their own counsels, or their own imaginations —
whether stUl to worship God, or instead of Him, any other
object of their own choosing. It is impossible, under such a
state of things to conceive of the Law as in active force. If all
sacrifice during its continuance was intermitted, even the daily
sacrifice must have been suspended also. Dr. Colenso (146, x)
has quoted this text of Amos ; but only to infer from it what
ought to have been done during all this time ; as if that
was the question in the present instance, and not what was
done. (258.) It may be inferred, secondly, from the fact, of which
we are made aware by Joshua, v. 3—9, that for this same
interval also even the rite of circumcision was suspended ; so
that, of the entire number of males and adults, all who were
under thirty-eight years of age, on the day of the passage of
the Jordan, March 36, B. C. 1530, were still uncircumcised.
Josh. V. 2 : " At that time the Lord said unto Joshua, Make
thee sharp knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel
the second time. ver. 3, And Joshua made him shai-p knives,
and circumcised the children of Israel at the hill of the fore
skins, ver. 4, And this is the cause why Joshua did circum
cise : All the people that came out of Egypt, that were males,
even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way.

172 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xxi.
after they came out of Egypt, ver. 5, Now all the people
that came out were circumcised : but all the people that were
born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out
of Egypt, them they had not circumcised  ver. 7, And their
children, whom He (the Lord) raised up in their stead, them
Joshua circumcised : for they were uncircumcised, because
they had not circumcised them by the way." Now the sum
total of males, who stood to the rest of the congregation in
the relation of "the children of Israel" (93), at the Exodus,
as we have seen (96), having been 44,546, the number of
males, adults, at this time, above the age of thirty-eight
years, could not have been more than 44,546 : and the entire
number of males and adults, above the age of twenty, in the
last year of the Exodus having been 601,730'', the number
of those among them, who had been born since the second year
ofthe Exodus, and were still uncircumcised, must have been
601,730-44,546, i.e. 557.184.
(259.) Now, if the rite of circumcision, the appointed means
of admission into the covenanted relation of the childi-en of
Abraham to God, and externally the sign and seal of that
relation, had been suffered to faU into abeyance for the last
thirty-eight years, what other injunction or observance of the
ceremonial Law could have been enforced during the same
interval of time ? Could the Passover, according to its proper
rites and ceremonies, have been once celebrated all this time ?
the Passover, of which no uncircumcised person, whether born
in the land or a stranger, was privileged to partake. And
without this outward badge of circumcision, what could there
have been during this interval to discriminate even the
children of Israel, as the people of God, and the heirs by
nature of the promises made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,
from the rest of the world in general, or from the Egyptians in
particular, among whom they had been born and bred, and
from among whom they had been taken, as exclusively the
people of God ? Uncircumcision as such, the external badge
or token of a state of non-relation to God, and of non-heirs of
covenanted privileges and distinctions, in opposition to those
who were so — in the persons of the natural descendants of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and of the heirs by nature of the
^ Numbers xxvi. 31.

QUEST. XXI.] Providonfor the Priests. 173
privileges covenanted in behalf of them and their children,
was to them a reproach, whUe it lasted — reducing them, in
point of nearness to God, and of spiritual distinctions entailed
by that relation, to the level of the Egyptians — whose
countrymen even the children of the Patriarchs at the Exodus
might be said to have been. And this explains the language
of the Deity to Joshua, as soon as the rite of circumcision, so
long suspended, had been renewed in the persons of these
contemporaries of the Eisodus, and this reproach had thereby
been removed : ver. 9, " And the Lord said unto Joshua,
This day have I rolled awav the reproach of Egypt from off
you." (260.) Thirdly, and lastly. On this particular question of
the time and place, when and where, the ceremonial Law, as a
system of rules and observances, both in public and in private
life, extending to aU the details and minutise of both, was
designed first to come into active operation, and ever after to
be of perpetual obUgation, we cannot refer to a better author
ity than Deut. xu. 5-9, 10-37 > confirmed also by xiv. 23-36,
XV. 30 ; delivered by Moses, as the interpreter of the inten
tions and will of the Author of that Law, from the first —
and in particular, Deut. xii. 8, 9 — ^which so plainly asserts
that those, whom he was addressing, though not for a
moment exempt from the restraints of the moral Law, yet at
that very time, (and by parity of reason, under the same
circumstances, aU along, before that time,) were under no
manner of restraint from the ceremonial Law ; and so plainly
also assigns the reason why ; viz. That all this time they had
been leading the life of sojourners and wanderers in the
vsdlderness, to which a rule and a discipline like that of the
Law was never intended to apply. Deut. xii. 8 : "Ye shall
not do after all the things that we do here this day, every man
whatsoever is right in his own eyes. ver. 9, For ye are not
as yet come to the rest and to the inheritance, which the
Lord your God giveth you."

174 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xxii.
Question XXII. — Tlie War on Midian.
(Colenso, ch. xxii. pp. 139-146.)

(261.) Dr. Colenso, being now arrived at that stage of his
Critical Examination of the Pentateuch, at which it was
necessary for him to re-view the circumstances of this War on
Midian, takes occasion (173) to express his thankfulness that,
after the many proofs of " the inconsistencies and impossibUi-
ties, which exist in the story of the Exodus as it lies before
us in the Pentateuch," (165) "he is no longer obliged to
believe, as a matter of fact, of vital consequence to his etemal
hope, the story related in Numb, xxi, where we are told
that a force of 13,000 Israelites slew all the males of the
Midianites, took captive all the females, seized all their cattle
and fiocks, and all their goods, and burnt all their cities, and
all their goodly castles, -without the loss of a single man —
and then by command of Moses, butchered in cold blood
the women and children, ' except aU the women chUdren, who
had not known man by lying -with him"' — (48,000, as Dr.
Colenso calculates their numbers, ordered by Moses to be
killed.) " The Tragedy of Cawnpore," he adds, " where 300
were butchered, would sink into nothing, compared with such
a massacre, if indeed we were required to believe it."
(262.) And I too, being arrived at this stage of my Con
sideration of his Critical Examination, would take occasion
from this observation of Dr. Colenso's itself, to draw a salutary
warning — for the safeguard of my own soul and that of my
readers — against the temptation to doubt, under any pretext
however specious, (the right of private judgment, freedom of
thought, candid and impartial inquiry, or the like,) when to
believe is the plain and obvious duty — lest doubt, once un
advisedly permitted, much more presumptuously entertained,
in the logical prosecution of its own reasonings, through a
series of steps, one rising above another in hardihood, as
necessary in their consequences, as irresistible in their tenden
cies, should culminate at last in blasphemy of the worst de
scription. There are few sceptics in the truth of the Bible,

QUEST. XXII.] M'ar on Midian. 175
who, at the outset of those speculations which have made
them what they are, would not have been horrified to have
been told that the infallible result of their free inquiries would
be to charge even the great Moral Governor of the universe,
or His ministers, acting by His command, and under His
sanction, -with a tragedy worse than that of Cawnpore.
(263.) If the accounts in the Pentateuch in general, and
this of the War of Midian in particular, according to Dr.
Colenso's euphemism in speaking of them, are unhistorical,
in plain English, they are untrue; and if they are untrue,
they are false ; and if they are false, they never happened ;
and if they never happened — ^no one is accountable for them,
probable or improbable, good or bad, as they may appear to
be. But if after all they are true — as they may be, for any
of Dr. Colenso's irrefragable proofs, as yet produced, to the
contrary — and as they must be, if the uniform belief and
testimony of the universal church, from the days of Moses
down to the present day, is worth any thing — then. Who is
reaUy responsible for this war on Midian, Moses and the
Israelites, who acted ministerially only in carrying it into
effect, or the God of Moses and the Israelites, who laid it
in charge upon them. Numb. xxv. 17, 18 — when the crimen
delicti which rendered the Midianites obnoxious to this visi
tation of his retributive justice, had just been committed — to
wage it against them, some time or other — who himself.
Numb. xxxi. 3, reminded Moses of that charge, when the
proper time for executing it was now arrived — by whose
orders consequently, and in resentment of an injury done to
himself, xxxi. 3, as much as to them, ver. 3, these soldiers
from his own army were sent on this errand of vengeance, —
whose directions they were merely obeying, xxxi. 7, in their
treatment of the Midianites, on the expedition — and whose
-will and pleasure, merely expressed through the mouth of
Moses, xxxi. 13-31, disposed of the captives andthe spoil?
And on whom, in this ease, must the refiection of having
been the author of a tragedy, incomparably worse than that of
Cawnpore, ultimately fall : Moses and the Israelites, or the
God of Moses and the Israelites?
(264.) The moral difficulties of Scripture, as they are called,
arising out of the historical facts accepted and treated as true —

176 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch. [quest, xxii.
the objections which appear to lie to the moral character or
qualities of some of the things recorded in Seripture, some
times with the approbation of God after they were done.
sometimes as by His command before they were done, and as the
cause of their being done, (such for instance as this treatment
of the Midianites, before the Eisodus, the extermination of the
natives of Canaan, at the Eisodus, the destruction of the
Amalekites, in the time of Saul, the act of Jael, in putting Sisera
to death, and the like,) — all such anomalies as these, whereby
the moral qualities of the things done, as they may appear to
us, and the moral attributes of the Author or Approver of them,
seem to be placed in contradiction and antagonism to each
other, would be escaped from at once, by giving up the histo
rical truth of the things themselves ; but admitting the matters
of fact themselves, it is impossible for any one to claim the
right of criticising, or reflecting on, the qualities ofthe things
done uiider such circumstances, by human agents indeed as the
instruments, but by the Divine impulse, as their tme first
cause, or with the Di-vine sanction, as stamping them with
their true moral character, -without claiming the right and
asserting the competence of the creature to sit in judgment on
his own Creator.
(265.) These objections, however, as presupposing the histo
rical certainty of the facts on which they are founded, belong to
a totally different class, from those -with which we have hitherto
been engaged — and to which our attention must still be con
fined. The moral difficulties or anomalies of Scripture history
admit of a satisfactory explanation ; but the truth of Scriptm-e
facts, if called in question, must first be established. I shall
therefore take no further notice of any of the questions which
appear to be raised in this chapter, except such as are simply
reducible to this issue of the matter of fact.
(266.) The first of these is the Chronology of this War on
Midian. Between the first event specified in the narrative,
with a date, the death of Aaron, on the first of the fifth month",
and the last after it similarly specified, the beginnmg of the
proceedings in Deuteronomy, the first of the eleventh month''.
Dr. Colenso (173, 174) contends that there could not have
been time for all the intermediate particulars, which are also
° Numb, xxxiii. 38, 39 j xx. 22-29. ^ Deut. i. 3.

QUEST. XXII.] War OH Midian. 177
on record, in this limited space of six months. And it must
be confessed that, according to his own conjectural estimate
and assumptions of the time taken up by each, there was not.
But I do not hesitate to say that no estimate and no arrange
ments could have been made more at random, or err more on
the side of excess, than these, which he proposes (173, 174).
(267.) I had occasion, as I have already explained, long
before these objections and difficulties of Dr. Colenso's had
probably yet been thought of even by himself, to consider the
chronology of this part of the Old Testament with the same
care as that of any other ; and assuming the true Julian date
of the death of Aaron, (the first of the fifth month in the last
year of the Exodus^,) to have been July 15, B. C. 1521, and
the first of the eleventh month, the beginning of the proceed
ings in Deuteronomy, January 11, B. C. 1520, and the inter
val between them just six months of thirty days each, 180
days in aU, I found no difficulty in bringing every distinct
event of the intermediate period which was upon record, within
these limits, and yet allowing as ample a space of time to each,
as the circumstances of the case to the best of my judgment
required. (268.) Dr. Colenso has offered no proofs of the truth of his
arrangements, and it would be contrary to the plan of this
work to enter at any length here on that of mine. One probable
argument however of the absurdity of his chronology, and one
simUar argument of the correctness of my own, I will take the
liberty of pointing out even here.
i. Between the death of Aaron, (July 15, B.C. 1531,) and
the conquest of the kingdom of Sihon, the chronology of Dr.
Colenso assumes an interval oifive months ; and between the
same date and the reduction of the kingdom of Og, an interval
of six months. On this supposition this latter must have been
going on, Dec. 13, B. C. 1531 — Jan. 11, B. C. 1530; and the
former, Nov. 13 — Dec. 13, B. C. 1531 — a period in the natural
year, at which for the climate of Persea, where this kingdom of
Sihon was situated, we need not hesitate to say the vintage must
have been over at least two months. And yet there is internal
evidence, (Numb. xxi. 33, cf xx. 17,) in the Scripture account
of the reduction of this kingdom itself, that it must have been
" See my Thi-ee Witnesses, p. 8j.
N

178 Historical Character ofthe Pentateuch, [quest, xxii.
going on when the -vintage was approaching to maturity, if
not already ripe — and consequently, for the climate of Peraea,
some time between Sept. 13, and Oct. 13, much more probably
than between even Oct. 13, and Nov. 13 — much less Nov. I3,
and Dec. 13.
ii. According to my own chronology, aU these interme
diate particulars, (the reduction of those two kingdoms, the
proceedings connected with the history of Balaam, the Midian-
itish expedition, the retum of the army, the seven days
of its exclusion from the camp,) having been brought to an
end, consistently with each other and with every note of time
on record, only a very few days before the end of the tenth
month, Jan. 10, B. C. 1530, the proceedings in Deuteronomy,
the most solemn and serious of the pubUc transactions in the
life of Moses (see 30 supra), taking their rise on the first of the
eleventh month, Jan. 11, B. C. 1530, are found to have been
thereby determined to ihe feria prima of the hebdomadal cycle,
the most likely a priori to have been selected, if the circum
stances of the case allowed of it, for the beginning and decursus
of a course of things, of so much gra-vity, so much importance,
and so mnch interest, as this. And the particulars of these
transactions ha-dng taken up, as they weU might do, the space
of one month exactly, Jan. ii-Feb. 9, both inclusive, the
death of Moses, the first thing after the close of all of them, is
found determined, agreeably to the Jewish tradition on that
point, to the first of the Adar of this aera, the first of the twelfth
month, Feb. 10, B. C. 1530 ; after which there is no uncer
tainty about the times and dates of subsequent events, down
to the day of the passage of the Jordan, the tenth of the Abib
of this sera, the Nisan of a later period, March 36, B. C. 1530,
-—ihe feria quinta.
(269.) Again, (173) it appears incredible to Dr. Colenso,
That so small a force as was sent on this expedition should
have done so much, taken so many castles, brought away so
many captives, and so much booty, without the loss of a single
man ! To which we may reply, that a fact like this, gravely
related of one of the campaigns of Napoleon Buonaparte, or
ofthe Duke of WeUington, (cf Colenso, 169,) (viz. that a de
tachment of his army, sent to invade an enemy's country, after
executing their commission, defeating aU resistance in the

quest, xxii.] War on Midian. 179
field, conquering, desolating, and spoiling every thing before
them, had returned without the loss of an individual soldier,)
might well have appeared extraordinary ; but as one of the
incidents, and one of the characters, of what are called the
Wars of the Lord^, I will make bold to say, so far from being
incredible, it is the very thing which under the circumstances
ofthe case was a priori most to be expected.
(270.) When wiU Christian commentators on these accounts
and these transactions begin to be consistent, and either agree
to exclude the supernatural element of causation from every
thing of which they read in Scripture, between the opening
of the commission of Moses in Egypt, and the settlement of
the Israelites in Canaan, or if they recognise it at all, admit
it in its totality, and allow it free scope as the real mover,
director, and effectuator of every thing ? Whose soldiers were
these who went on this Midianitish expedition, and by whose
command, and with whose orders, did they go forth ? Who
was He who appeared to Joshua, in the form of a man, and
as the Captain of the Host of the Lord, at the very outset of
the Wars in Canaan, and gave directions himself respecting
the siege and capture of Jericho, the first incident of those
Wars ? What army was ever before, or ever after, so com
manded, as that of the Israelites ? And what army so com
manded could possibly have been exposed to the ordinary
casualties of war ?
(271.) These Wars in Canaan, once begun, lasted six years
at least before their further prosecution was suspended for a
time, in order that the division of the conquered country among
the people might begin ; and during all this time there is no
evidence, (at least in Scripture,) that a single Israelite lost his
life by the sword of the Canaanites, except the thirty-six. Josh.
vii. 5, struck down in the first attempt to capture the city of
Ai — and that too only at a time when their Defence had
been withdrawn from them, and their whole army was under
the ban of the curse, entailed upon it by the crime of Aehaui:^.
And though it may be objected that Scripture itself is just as
silent about the contrary fact, that no life was actually lost in
these wars, the reason of things, and the peculiar circum-
' Numb. xxi. 14 ; cf Joshua x. 13 ; 2 Sam. i. 18. « Cf Joshua xxii. 20.
N 2

180 Historical Character of the Pentateuch, [quest, xxii.
stances of the case, would authorise us to interpret its silence
in favour of this latter presumption, much more than m
favour of the former. And strange as it may seem to Dr.
Colenso, I have little doubt myself that, if the history of
these Wars had come down to us, in the Book of those Wars,
or in the Book of Jasher, before referred to (269), it would have
been seen that what appears to him the most incredible circum
stance of the Midianitish expedition, was one of the most ordi
nary and familiar characteristics of all these Wars, -viz. that
while the armies of the God of Heaven, waging these wars,
had yet done, and were still doing, nothing to forfeit His
protection, they went through all the campaigns of those Wars,
-without the loss of a single man. Not a man was lost in
these Wars -with the kings of the south h, beginning with the
battle of Gibeon ; nor in those -with the kings of the north',
beginning with the battle of the waters of Merom. And as
a consequence of all this, among the numbers who crossed
the Jordan on March 36, B. C. 1530, in the first year of
the Eisodus, with the slight exception pointed out supra (at
the siege of Ai), when these soldiers of the Lord came to
receive their share of the common inheritance at last, pro
bably not one was found to be missing ^.
(272.) Preservation from the usual dangers of war, and
-victory over however superior numbers, were among the privi
leges more than once promised and guaranteed to the people
by God, on His part, on condition of obedience to himself
on theirs' ; and what even the individual strength and prowess
of one man, assisted and empowered by God, was capable of
effecting, we may learn from the history of Samson, or from
that of the Woi-thies of David ">.
(273.) I have thus gone through all the objections to the
historical character of the Pentateuch, which are distinctly
brought forward and specially insisted on, in the first Part of
the " Pentateuch and Book of Joshua critically examined."
The above review will shew that on each of these points
the duty of the defender of Scripture has been the very

•i Joshua X. 1-43. I xi. 1-23, cf Joshua i. 5-9, xii. 1-24, xiv. 6-15.
'' Cf Joshua xxi. 43-45, xxiii. 14-16, xxiv. 11-18. • Numb. x. 9,
cf. xxxi. 6 : Levit. xxvi. 7, 8 : Deut. vii. 24, xi. 25 : Joshua i. 5-9, xxiii. 9, 10.
01 2 Sam. xxiii. 8-17, 18-39 : ' Chron. xi. 10-19, "20-47, xxvii. 6.

quest, xxii.] War on Midian. 181
simple one of pointing out some error of judgment — cor
recting some falsehood of assumption — on some question of
fact or other, by which the author of these objections
must have deceived himself, before he could have attempted
to mislead others ; and the principal difficulty with which he
had to contend in the discharge of this duty was that of
exposing the mistakes of judgment and assumption on which
these objections were founded, with all freedom and openness
of speech, and yet sparing the feelings of the objector himself.
It has been my aim and endeavour, and certainly my wish
and desire, aU through the preceding discussions, to pay equal
regard to both these obligations ; to do simple justice to the
truth, by plainly exposing the mistakes of Dr. Colenso, and
yet to respect the law of Christian charity by saying as little,
personally offensive to himself, as possible.

THE END.

rEBEUAET, 1863.
NEW WORKS AND NEW EDITIONS,

published bx

MESSRS. EIYINGTON,
3, WATERLOO PLACE, PALL MALL, LONDON.

McCaiil. — An Examination of Bishop Colenso's Dif
ficulties with regard to the Pentateuch. By the Eev. Alex
ander McCaul, D.D., Professor of Hebrew and Old Testa
ment Exegesis, King's College, London. Cro-vsn Svo. (In
the press.')
Wordsworth. — Journal of a Tour in Italy; particu
larly with reference to the Present Oondition and Prospects
of Eeligion in that country. By Ohr. Wordsworth, D.D.,
Canon of Westmiaster. In Two Vols., post Svo. 15s.
(Now ready ^
Alford.— The New Testament for English Readers :
consisting of the Authorized Yersion of the Sacred Text ;
Marginal Eeferences ; Various Eeadings ; and a Popular
Commentary. By Henry Alford, D.D., Dean of Canterbury.
In Two Volumes, Svo. (In the press.')
Clissold. — Lamps of the Church ; or, Rays of
Eaith, Hope, and Charity, from the Lives and Deaths of
some Eminent Christians of the Nineteenth Century. By
the Eev. H. Ohssold, M.A., Author of I. " Last Hours
of Eminent Ohristian Men ;" II. " Last Hours of Eminent
Christian Women." Crown Svo., urit'h five Portraits beau
tifully engraved on Steel. Qs. Qd. (Now ready ^

*^* In this volume will be found
Memorials of WilUam Cowper— Henry
Kirke White — Henry Martyn — Clau
dius Buchanan — John Bowdler — Tho
mas Rennell — Legh Richmond — Han

nah More — Mary Jane Graham — Wil
liam Wilberforce — Thomas Arnold —
Robert Anderson — Hedley Vicars —
Bishop Armstrong — Bishop Blomfield
— and many others.

2 NEW WORKS AND NEW EDITIONS.
Moreton.— Life and Work in Newfoundland: Remi
niscences of Thirteen Tears spent there. By the Eev. Julian
Moreton, Colonial Chaplain at Labuan. Crown Svo., with
Illustrations. (In the press.)
Boyle.— The Inspiration of the Book of Daniel, and
incidentally of other portions of Sacred Scripture. With a
correction of Profane, and an adjustment of Sacred Chro
nology. By W. E. A. Boyle. Svo. (In the press.)
Goulburn. — Lectures on the English Office of the
Holy Communion. By Edward Meyrick Goulburn, D.D.,
Prebendary of St. Paul's, and one of Her Majesty's Chaplains
ia Ordinary. In Two Vols., small Svo. (In the press).
Seymour. Mackarness. — Eighteen Years of a Cle
rical Meeting : being the Minutes of the Aleester Clerical
Association, from 1842 to 1860; with a Preface on the
Eevival of Euridecanal Chapters. Edited by Eichard Sey
mour, M.A., Eector of Kinwarton and Eural Dean; and
John E. Mackarness, M.A., late Vicar of Tardebigge, in the
Diocese of Worcester, now Eector of Honiton. Crown Svo.
6s. Qd.
Mackenzie. — Ordination Lectures, delivered in Rise-
holme Palace Chapel, during Ember Weeks. By the Eev.
Henry Mackenzie, M.A., one of the Chaplains to the Lord
Bishop of Lincoln, &c. &c. Small Svo. 3s.

Contents :— Pastoral Government
— Educational Work — Self-govern
ment in the Pastor — Missions and

their Reflex Results — Dissent — PubUc
Teaching — Sunday Schools — Doctrinal
Controversy — Secular Aids.

Alford.— Sermons on Christian Doctrine, preached
in Canterbury Cathedral, on the Afternoons of the Sundays
in the year 1861-62. By Henry Alford, D.D., Dean of
Canterbury. In crown Svo. 7s. 6d. (Lately published.)

RIVINGTONS, WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON.

NEW WORKS AND NEW EDITIONS. 3
McCaul. — Testimonies to the Divine Authority and
Inspiration of Holy Seripture, as taught by the Church of
England. By the Eev. A. McCaul, D.D., Prebendary of
St. Paul's, Professor of Ecclesiastical History at King's
College, and Eector of St. Magnus. Crown Svo. 4s. 6d.
(Lately published.)
Gurney. — Sermons on the Acts of the Apostles. By
John Hampden Ourney, M.A., late Eector of St. Mary's
Church, Marylebone. Small Svo. 7s. (Just published.)
Lately published ly the same Author,
Sermons chiefly on Old Testament Histories, from Texts ia the
Sunday Lessons. Second JEdition. 6s.
Sermons on Texts from the Epistles and Gospels for twenty
Sundays. Second Edition. 6s.
Miscellaneous Sermons. 6s.
Goulburn.— Thoughts on Personal Religion. By
Edward Meyrick Goulburn, D.D., Prebendary of St. Paul's,
and one of Her Majesty's Chaplains in. Ordinary. Third
Edition, with two additional Chapters. SmaU Svo. 6s. Qd.
WUliams. — The Beginning of the Book of Genesis,
¦with Notes and Eeflections. By the Eev. Isaac WiUiams,
B.D. Printed uniformly with Mr. Williams's Harmony and
Commentary on the Gospels, in small Svo. 7s. Qd.
Greswell.— The Three Witnesses, and the Threefold
Cord ; being the testimony of the Natural Measures of
Time, of the Primitive Civil Calendar, and of Antediluvian
and Postdiluvian Tradition, on the principal questions of
fact in sacred or profane Antiquity. By Edward Greswell,
B.D., Eellow of Corpus Christi CoUege, Oxford. Svo. 7s. Qd.
(Lately published^
Mozley. — A Review of the Baptismal Controversy.
By J. B. Mozley, B.D., Vicar of Old Shoreham, late Eellow
of Magdalen College, Oxford. Svo. 9s. Qd. (Lately published^

RIVINGTONS, WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON.

4 NEW WORKS AND NEW EDITIONS.
Williams.— A Devotional Comraentary on the Book
of Psalms. By the Eev. Isaac Williams, B.D., late EeUow
of Trinity College, Oxford. In Three Vols., smaU Svo. (In
the press.)
Clabon.— Praise, Precept, and Prayer; a Complete
Manual of Eamily Worship. By J. M. Clabon. In One
large Volume, Svo. 16s.
Markby.— The Man Christ Jesus ; or, the Daily Life,
and Teaching of our Lord, in Childhood and Manhood, on
Earth. By the Eev. Thomas Markby, M.A., lately After
noon Lecturer at St. James's, Paddington. Crown Svo.
9s. Qd.
Notes on Wild Flowers.— By a Lady. Small Svo.
(In the press)
Goulburn.— Sermons preached on Various Occasions
during the last Twenty Tears. By Edward Meyrick Goul
burn, D.D. In Two Vols., small Svo. 10s. Qd.
Devotional.— The Threshold of Private Devotion;
containing Prayers, and Extracts from the Holy Scriptures
and from Various Authors. 18mo. 2s.
WUliams. — Female Characters of Holy Scripture ; in
a Series of Sermons. By the Eev. Isaac Williams, B.D.,
late Eellow of Trinity CoUege, Oxford. Second Edition.
Small Svo. 5s. Qd.
Wordsworth. — The Holy Year ; Hymns for Sundays
and Holydays, and for other Occasions. By Chr. Words
worth, D.D., Canon of Westminster. Small Svo. 4s. Qd. in
extra cloth, or 10s. Qd. in morocco. Also a cheaper Edition,
price 2s. Qd.
Page. — The Pretensions of Bishop Colenso to im
peach the Wisdom and Veracity of the Compilers of the Holy
Scriptures considered. By the Eev. James E. Page, M.A.,
Editor of " Burnet's Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles ;"
Author of " Position of the Church of England in the Catholic
World," and other works. Svo. (In the press.)

RIVINGTONS, WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON.

NEW WORKS AND NEW EDITIONS. 5
Alford.— The Greek Testament ; with a critically
revised Text : a Digest of Various Eeadings : Marginal Ee
ferences to Verbal and Idiomatic Usage : Prolegomena : and a
copious Critical and Exegetical Commentary in English. Eor
the Use of Theological Students and Ministers. By Henry
Alford, D.D., Dean of Canterbury. In Pour Vols., Svo.
Vol. I. — The Eour Gospels. A Fifth Edition is in the press.
Vol. IL— Acts to II. Corinthians. Fourth Edition. 24s.
Vol. III. — Galatians to Philemon. Third Edition. 18s.
Vol. IV. — Hebrews to Eevelation. Second Edition. 32s.
Thefov/rth Volume may still he had in Two Parts.
Knowles. — Notes on the Epistle to the Hebrews, with
Analysis and Brief Paraphrase ; for Theological Students.
Dedicated by permission to the Lord Bishop of Oxford. By
the Eev. E. H. Knowles, late Michel Fellow of Queen's
College, Oxford. Crown Svo. Qs. Qd.
The Annual Register ; or, a View of the History and
Politicsofthe Year 1861'. Svo. 18s.
Peile. — The Miracle of Healing Power. Christ in
His Man's Nature through Death Man's Quickener into Life
in God : an Argument from Scripture only. By Thomas
WiUiamson Peile, D.D., Incumbent of St. Paul's, Hamp
stead, late ViCar of Luton, Beds, and sometime EeUow of
Trinity College, Cambridge. Svo. 5s.
Crosthwaite. — Eight Lectures on the Historical
Events and Characters in the Book of Daniel : to which are
added, Eour Discourses on the Doctrine of our Mutual Ee
cognition in a Euture State. Inscribed, by permission, to his
Grace the late Archbishop of Armagh. By the Eev. J. C.
Crosthwaite, M.A., Eector of St. Mary-at-HUl, London.
12mo. (In the press.)
Adams. — The Shadow of the Cross : an Allegory. By
the late Eev. W. Adams, M.A. A New Edition, elegantly
printed in crown Svo., with Illustrations, price 3s. Qd. in
extra cloth, gilt edges.

RIVINGTONS, WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON.

6 NEW. WORKS AND NEW EDITIONS.
Douglas.— Sermons. By Henry Alexander Douglas,
M.A., Dean of Cape Town. 12mo. 4s. Qd.
Green. — Brief Memorials of the late Rev. Charles
Green, M.A., of Worcester College, Oxford ; Missionary and
Secretary of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel.
Small Svo. 2s. Qd.
Wordsworth. — The New Testament of our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ, in the Original Greek. With Notes,
Introductions, and Indexes. By Chr. Wordsworth, D.D.,
Canon of Westminster. New Edition. In Two Vols., im
perial Svo. 4Z. Or separately.
Part I. -. The Eour Gospels. New Edition. 11. Is.
Part IL : The Acts. New Edition. 10s. Qd.
Part IIL. The Epistles of St. Paul. New Edition. 11. lis. Qd.
Part IV. : The General Epistles and Book of Eevelation ; with
Indexes. New Edition. 11. Is.
Goulburn. — An Introduction to the Devotional Study
of the Holy Scriptures. By Edward Meyrick Goulburn,
D.D. Fifth Edition. SmaU'Svo. 4.s. Qd.
Roman Biography. — De Viris Ulustribus Urbis
EomsB, a Eomulo ad Augustum. An Elementary Latin
Eeading Book, being a Series of Biographical Chapters on
Eoman History, chronologically arranged ; simplified from
the Text of Livy and other Eoman writers ; adapted, with
Annotations and a Vocabulary, from the work of Professor
Lhomond. By the Editor of the " Graduated Series of
English Eeading Books." Small Svo. 8s.
Atkins. — Six Discourses on Pastoral Duties, preached
before the University of Dublin ; being the Donnellan Lec
tures for 1860. By WUliam Atkins, D.D., formerly Eellow
of Trinity College, Dublin; Eector of Tullyagnish, Diocese
of Eaphoe ; and Examining Chaplain to the Lord Bishop of
Derry. Svo. 6s.

RIVINGTONS, WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON.

NEW WORKS AND NBW EDITIONS. 7
Alford.— Reminiscences by a Clergyman's Wife.
Edited by The Dean of Canterbury. Seeond Edition. Crown
Svo. 3s. Qd.
Glover.— England, the Remnant of Judah, and the
Israel of Ephraim. By the Eev. E. E. A . Glover, M. A., Chap
lain to the Consulate at Cologne. Svo. 6s. 6^.
Miller.— Parochial Sermons. By the Rev. J. K.
MiUer, late Vicar of Walkeringham, Notts, and formerly
EeUow of Trinity College, Cambridge. Small Svo. 4s. Qd.
Hawkins.— The Limits of Religious Belief: Sugges
tions addressed to the Student in Divine Things. By the
Eev. Wm. Bentinck Hawkins, M.A., E.E.8., of Exeter Col
lege, Oxford. SmaU Svo. 2s. Qd.
Wordsworth.— The 'Inspiration of the Bible ; Five
Lectures, delivered in Westminster Abbey. By Christopher
Wordsworth, D.D., Canon of Westminster. Post Svo. 3s. Qd.
Wordsworth. — The Interpretation of the Bible ; Five
Lectures, delivered in Westminster Abbey. By the same
Author. Post Svo. 3s. Qd.
Galloway.— Ezekiel's Sign, Metrically Paraphrased
and Interpreted, from his Eourth and Eifth Chapters ; with
Notes and Elucidations from the Sculptured Slabs of Nineveh.
By W. B. GaUoway, M.A., Incumbent of St. Mark's, Eegent's
Park, and Chaplain to the Viscount Hawarden. Small Svo.
2s. Qd.
Byng. — Sermons for Households. By Francis E. C.
Byng, M.A., Eector of Little Casterton. Crown Svo. 3s. Qd.
Henley.— The Prayer of Prayers. By the Hon. and
Eev. Eobert Henley, M.A., Perpetual Curate of Putney.
SmaU Svo. 4s. Qd.

RIVINGTONS, WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON.

8 NEW WORKS AND NEW EDITIONS.
Warter.— The Sea-board and the Down; or, My
Parish in the South. By John Wood Warter, B.D., Vicar
of Weat Tarring, Sussex. In Two Vols., smaU 4to., with
Illustrations. 2Ss.
Trevelyan.— Quarr Abbey, or the Mistaken Calling;
a Tale of the Isle of Wight in the Thirteenth Century. By
Erances A. Trevelyan, Author of " Lectures on English His
tory." SmaU 4to., price Is. Qd., or in cloth, with lUustrations,
2s. 'Qd
Monsell.— Parish Musings; or, Devotional Poems.
By John S. B. MonseU, LL.D., Vicar of Egham, Surrey, and
Eural Dean. Mfih Edition. 2s.
Hooper.— The Revelation of Jesife Christ ; expounded
by Erancis Bodfield Hooper, Eector of Upton Warren, Wor
cestershire, Author of "A Guide to the Apocalypse," and
other Works. In Two Vols., Svo. 2Ss.
Hodgson. — Instructions for the Use of Candidates for
Holy Orders, and of the Parochial Clergy, as to Ordination,
Licences, Induction, Pluralities, Eesidence, &c. &c., with
Acts of Parliament relating to the above, and Eorms to be
used. By Christopher Hodgson, M.A., Secretary to the
Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty. Eighth Edition. In
Svo. 12s.
*** In this Edition such alterations I cessary in consequence of recent amend-
have been made as appeared to be ne- | ments in the laws relating to the Clergy.
Giles. — Village Sermons, preached at some of the
chief Christian Seasons, in the Parish Church of Belleau with
Aby. By J. D. GUes, M.A., late Eector. SmaU Svo. 5s.

RIVINGTONS, WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON.

PAMPHLETS LATELY PUBLISHED

MESSES. EIVINGTON.

A Letter to the Clergy of the Diocese of Llandaff, in reference to
the Critical Examination of the Pentateuch by the Bishop of Natal. By
Alfred Olhvant, D.D., Bishop of Llandaff. Svo. Is. 6d.
Plain Possible Solutions of the Objections of the Eight Eev. John
Wilham Colenso, D.D., Bishop of NataL By the Rev. George Vallis Gar
land, M.A., Rector of Langton Matravers, Dorset. Svo. is. 6d.
An Answer to the DifEculties in Bishop Colenso's Book on the
Pentateuch. By the Rev. J. B. Turner, Vicar of Marsworth, Bucks. Svo.
Is.
Letter to Bishop Colenso, wherein his Objections to the Penta
teuch are Eiamined in Detail. By the Rev. William H. Hoare, M.A.
Second Edition. Svo. Is.
Parochial Mission- Women ; their Work and its Emits. By the
Hon. Mrs. J. C. Talbot. Second Edition. Small Svo. 2s. in limp cloth.
Eive Short Letters to Sir WiUiam Heathcote, Bart., M.P. for the
University of Oxford, on the Studies and Discipline of Puhlic Schools. By
George Moberly, D.C.L., Head Master of Winchester CoUege. Second
Edition. Svo. 2s. 6d.
Speech delivered by the Eight Hon. B. Disraeli, M.P., at a Public
Meeting in aid of the Oxford Diocesan Society for the Augmentation of
SmaU Benefices, held at High Wycombe, October SOth, 1862. Pubhshed
by permission. 3d., or 2s. 6d. per dozen.
Congregational Music. A Sermon, preached before the Choral
Association of the Diocese of Llandaff, in the Cathedral of Llandaff, on Oct.
16, 1862. By Alfred Olhvant, D.D., Bishop of Llandaff. Svo. 6d.
" The Waiting Isles." A Sermon preached at the Earewell
Service of the Mission to the Sandwich Islands, in Westminster Abbey,
July 23, 1862. By the Right Rev. the Bishop of Honolulu. Svo. Is.

10 PAMPHLETS LATELY PUBLISHED.
An Apology for the Beard ; addressed to Men in General, to the
Clergy in Particular. By Artium Magister. SmaU Svo. Is. 6d.
Soundings of Antiquity : a New Method of applying the Astro
nomical Evidences to the Events of History; and an Assignment of true
Dates to the Epochs of the Church. By the Rev. H. M. Grover, Rector of
Hitcham, Bucks. 8vo. Is.
The Spirit of Truth, and the Spirit of the World ; a Sermon
preached before the University of Oxford. By R. C. Coxe, M.A., Arch
deacon of Lindisfarne, aud Canon of Durham. Second Edition. Svo. Is.
Hold fast the Eorm of Sound Words. An Argument on Creeds
and Confessions of Faith, in a Sermon, by the same Author. Is.
The Doctrine of Justification and the Harmony of the Apostles
Paul and James considered, with particular reference to the Treatise of
Bishop O'Brien. In three Letters, reprinted from the British Magazine.
Designed for the Use of Students in Divinity. SmaU Svo. Price Is. 6d.
in limp clotti.
Eour Sermons preached at the Anniversary Eestival of the Con
secration of the Church, on Sunday, Sept. 29, and Oct. 3, 1861, at St.
Michael's, Tenbury. Svo. 2s.
Lectures on the OiEce and Duties of Churchwardens, Chapel-
wardens, and Sidesmen, Parish Clerks, and Sextons, delivered to the
Students of the Theological College, Lichfield, by James Thos. Law, M.A.,
ChanceUor of the Diocese, and late Special Commissary of the Diocese of
Bath and WeUs. Svo. 3s.
An Essay on the Angels of the Churches : Eev. ii. iii. By the
Rev. George Holden, M.A, 6d.
Church Extension in St. Pancras. A comparative Statement of
the Increase of Population and Church Accommodation in that Parish, from
1801 to 1851 ; with a Summary of the measures in progress to provide for
its spiritual wants. By WiUiam Rivington. Third Edition. Svo. 6d.
Mazzaroth ; or, The Constellations. In three Parts. Eoyal Svo.
lOs.
A Dissertation on the Sacrament of Baptism. By the Eev. W.
Meara, B.A. Svo. 2s. 6d.
Occasional Paper of the Oxford, Cambridge, Dublin, and Durham
Mission to Central Africa ; containing Letters from Bishop Mackenzie, Dr.
Livingstone, and others. Svo. Is.
Third Eeport of the Columbia Mission, 1861. Svo. Qd.

TRACTS ON
CONEIEMATION, THE SAOEAMEJSTTS, THE CHUECH
CATECHISM, AND OTHEE SUBJECTS.

The Rite of Confirmation Explained. By the Rev. D. J. Eyre, M.A., Sub-Dean
of Sarum. Price 4d., or 3s. 6d. per dozen.
Questions and Answers on Confirmation. By W. F. Hook, D.D., Dean of
Chichester. Price 2d., or 15s. per lOQ.
A Plain Catechism before Confirmation. By the Ven. Archd. Dodgson, M.A. 2d.
Manual on Confirmation. By Chr. Wordsworth, D.D. Is.
On the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. By the Plaiu Man's Friend. Price id.
A Companion to the Lord's Supper. By the same Author. 8d. bound.
The Happy Communicant; or, the Soldier Armed. A true Story. By the Rev.
John James, D.D., Canon of Peterborough. Price Sd., or 2s. 6d. per dozen.
The Benefit of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Explained. By Edward
Burton, D.D. Price 2d., or 15s. per 100.
Infant Baptism, and the Mode of Administering it. By R. Twopeny, B.D. 6d.
Plain Remarks on Infant Baptism and Confirmation. By W. J. Edge, M.A. 3d.
Infant Stories on Holy Baptism, the Visitation of the Sick, and the Burial of the
Dead. By a Lady. Price id.
The Infant Christian's First Catechism. By Mrs. Parry, of Barbados. Price
3d., or 2s. 6d. per dozen.
It is Written : or, the Catechism teaching from Scripture ; a Manual in Question
and Answer. By the Rev. C. J. Heathcote, M.A. 6d., or 5s. per dozen.
Help and Comfort for the Sick Poor. By the Author of " Sickness : its Trials
and Blessings." New Edition, in large print. Is.
Prayers for the Sick and Dying. By the same Author. Price 2s. Gd.
Eyes and Ears ; or, the History of one who was Deaf and BUnd. Price 2d., or
25 for 3s. 6d.
BUndness; its Trials and Blessings. By the Author of "Eyes and Ears.'' 2d.,
or 25 for 3s. 6d.
Instructions for the Rehef of the Sick Poor in Diseases of frequent Occurrence.
By the late R. Pearson, M.D. ISmo. Price Is. 6d.
The Cottage Bee-Hive. Price 3d., or 2s. 6d. per dozen.
An Exhortation to the Lord's Day. By the Ven. R. W Evans, M.A., Arch
deacon of Westmoreland. Price Is. dd.
How Lent may be kept both by Rich and by Poor. By the Rev. C. E. Ken-
naway. Price 2d., or one dozen and a half for 2s. 6d.
The Christian Servant Warned : being the substance of a ViUage Sermon. By the
Rev. Francis Phillott, M.A. Price 6d.
Pastoral Counsels to Servants. By the late Rev. Henry Pritchard, B.D. 4d.
Advice to a Pubhc School Boy. By the Rev. F. Poynder, M.A. 18mo. Price 6d.
The Holy Bible the One Design of One Eternal Mind. By the Rev. David
Laing, M.A., Incumbent of Trinity, St. Pancras. Price Is.
Brief History of the Book of Common Prayer. By the same Author. Price Is.
An Explanation of Dr. Watts's Hymns, in Question and Answer. Price 8d., or
7s. per dozen.

ANGLO-CONTINENTAL SOCIETY.
The BOOKS and TEA CTS pubhshed by thia Society may now
be had of Messrs. Rivington.
The ANNUAL PAPEE for 1862, contaming a Catalogue of
the Society's PubUcations, is now ready.
The EEPOET to the Subscribers to the Special Italian Eund is
now ready, price 6d,

PERIODICALS

PTTBLISHED BT

MESSRS. RIVINGTON.

ISontUy, price Sixpence,
The COLONIAL CHUECH CHEONICLB, and MISSION
ARY JOURNAL.
This Periodical was set on foot more than fifteen years ago, with the object of
circulating valuable information which would otherwise be unattainable by the
Church at large, and to afford a means of eUciting the opinions of persons engaged
or interested in Missionary Work.
It is hoped that this endeavour has not been fruitless. In the volumes already
pubUshed will be fouud many valuable communications, with Records of Mission
ary Labour and Articles on Missionary Subjects of great and permanent interest.

Monthly, at One Penny,
The CHUECH INSTITUTION CIECULAE.

PERIODICALS 13
(continued.)
Quarterly, at 3d. per Number,
IN COinOiXION WITH
THE INCORPORATED SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING
THE ENLARGEMENT, BUILDING, AND REPAIRING OF CHURCHES
AND CHAPELS IN ENGLAND AND WALES,
W^t Cfiurffi 35uatrer,
AN ILLUSTRATED JOURNAL OF
CHURCH EXTENSION IN ENGLAND AND WALES.
Supplied post-free to aU Subscribers of One ShUUng and
Eourpence per annum, paid iu advance.
The Editor aoUcits the co-operation of Churchmen in his efforts to render this
Periodical subservient to the interests of the Church Building Society, and to
the work of Church Extension generally in England and Wales. AU Com
munications should be addressed to the Editor, No. 7, WhitehaU, London, S.W.
Nos. I. to V. are published.

Quarterly, at Id. per Number,
CHUECH-WOEK AMONG THB MASSES ; in connexion
with the London Diocesan Church Building Society.
Nos. I. to VI. are pubhshed.

Quarterly, at One Penny,
The HOME MISSION EIELD of the CHUECH of ENG-
LAND ; in connexion with the Additional Curates' Society.
Nos. I. to XVII. are pubhshed.

EIVINGTONS, WATEELOO PLACE, LONDON.

PSALMS AND HYMNS
ADAPTED TO THB
SERVICES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
BY THB EEV. W. J. HALL, M.A.,
late Priest in Ordinary to Her Majesty, and Vicar of Tottenham.

From the great care bestowed upon this coUection (under the immediate super
vision of the late Lord Bishop of London), that it should be souud in doctrine,
spiritual in tone, and practical in tendency, it has been most extensively adopted
throughout this country, as well as in our Dependencies and Colonies, in America,
aud also in most of the EngUsh Churches abroad. Nearly a mUUou and a half
have been sold altogether of the various Editions.

THIS WOEK IS PEINTED IN THE rOLLOWING SIZES :-

32mo, Nonpareil type, cloth Ump, cut flush
 .  cloth, boards
 ¦  sheep 
 roan, with gUt edges
32mo and 48mo, Fine Paper, Pearl type, cloth, gold mitre, g.
 purple morocco
24mo, Bourgeois type, cloth limp, cut flush
 cloth, boards
 sheep .....
 ¦  roan, with gilt edges
24mo, Fine Paper, Bourgeois type, cloth, with gold mitre
 purple calf .
 purple calf, extra, gilt
 '¦  morocco, gUt edges
ISmo, Pica type, cloth, with gold mitre
 roan, with gilt edges, or purple calf
 purple calf, extra, gilt edges .
 morocco .....

Octavo, Pica type, cloth, with gold mitre .
 morocco, gilt edges

edges

s. d.
0 8

1 8
2 0

4 6
5 6
S 0
12 0

Messrs. Rivington keep several sizes of the Psalms and Hymns, bound with
the Book of Common Prayer.

A SELECTION of PSALM and HYMN TUNES, with Chants,
Sanctuses, Ifc. harmonized for Four Voices, and especially adapted io this
Work.

Royal Svo, cloth
 half-bound in calf .
 bound in whole calf
 calf extra, gUt edges
 purple morocco

0 12
0 14
0 16
0 18
1 1

Also a HAND-BOOK edition of the above for Congregational use. 3s. 6rf.
A Considerable. AUowance made to ihe Clergy, Organists, and for Charitable
Purposes.

WOUKS
EDITED EOE THE SYNDICS
OF THE
CAMBRIDGE UNIVEHSITY PEESS.
SOLD BY EIVINGTONS,
CAMBRIDGE WAREHOUSE, 32, PATERNOSTER ROW,
AND 3, WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON.

Pearson's Exposition of the Creed ; edited by Temple Ohevallier,
B.D., Professor of Mathematics in the University of Durham, and late Fellow
and Tutor of St. Catharine's College, Cambridge. Second Edition. Svo.
10s. 6d.
Select Discourses, by John Smith, late EeUow of Queens' College,
Cambridge. Edited by H. G. WiUiams, B.D., Professor of Arabic in the
University. Royal Svo. 10s. 6d.
The Works of Isaac Barrow, compared with the Original MSS.
enlarged with Materials hitherto unpublished. A New Edition, by A.
Napier, M.A., of Trinity College, Vicar of Holkham, Norfolk. 9 vols. Svo.
il. lis. 6d.
A Treatise of the Pope's Supremacy, and a Discourse concerning
the Unity of the Church. By Isaac Barrow. Svo. 12s.
Wheatly on the Common Prayer ; edited by G. E. Corrie, D.D.,
Master of Jesus CoUege, Examining Chaplain to the Lord Bishop of Ely.
Svo. 10s. 6d.
The Gospel according to Saint Matthew in Anglo-Saxon and
Northumbrian Versions, synopticaUy arranged : with Collations of the best
Manuscripts. By J. M. Kemble, M.A., and Archdeacon Hardwick, late
Christian Advocate. 10s.
Cambridge Greek and English Testament, in Parallel Columns
on the same page. Edited by J. Scholefield, M.A., late Regius Professor
of Greek in the University. Fourth Edition. Small Svo. 7s. Gd., or 12s.
in morocco.
Cambridge Greek Testament. Ex editione Stephani tertia, 1550.
SmaU Svo. 3s. Gd.
The Homilies, with Various Eeadings, and the Quotations from
the Fathers given at length in the Original Languages. Edited by G. E.
Corrie, D.D. Svo. lOs. Gd.
Archbishop Usher's Answer to a Jesuit, with other Tracts on
Popery. Edited by J. Scholefield, M.A. Svo. 13s. Gd.
Lectures on Divinity delivered in the University of Cambridge.
By John Hey, D.D. Third Edition, by T. Tnrton, D.D., Lord Bishop of
Bly. 2 vols. 8vo. 30s.
A complete List of the Publications of the Cambridge University
Press may he had on application to Messrs. Eivington.

BIBLES,
COMMON PRAYER BOOKS,
8fc.,
PB.INTED AT

MESSRS. RIVINGTON
BEG LEAVE TO ANNOUNCE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN APPOINTED
AGENTS FOE THE SALE OF THE ABOVE EDITIONS,
VVHICH MAY BE SEEN AT
No. 3, WATERLOO PLACE, PALL MALL,
AND AT THEIR CAMBRIDGE WAREHOUSE,
No. 32, PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON.
Catalogues may he had gratis.

GILBERT AND RIVINGTON, PRINTERS, ST. JOHN'S SQUARE, LONDON.

3 9002 00749 7622