16. Chapter VII: Miscellaneous Passages.

Chapter VII: Miscellaneous Passages. The Genealogical Table in Genesis 10.

It has often been asserted that the genealogical table in Genesis 10 cannot be from Moses; since so extended a knowledge of nations lies far beyond the geographical horizon of the Mosaic age. This hypothesis must now be considered as exploded. The new discoveries and investigations in Egypt have shown that they maintained even from the most ancient times, a vigorous commerce with other nations, and sometimes with very distant nations. The proofs are found in Creuzer,^[707]Heeren,^[708] in my Contributions,^[709] and in Wilkinson.^[710] This last author, among other things, remarks, that the strongest proof for the commerce of the Egyptians with distant nations of Asia, is furnished by the materials out of which many of the articles in use in civil and domestic life, found in the tombs of Thebes which belong to the 18th or 19th dynasty, are made in Egypt; for example, the vessels of wood, which are commonly made of foreign wood, and not seldom of the mahogany of India.

[707] Symb. Th I. S. 319 ff.

[708] S. 275, 321 ff., 376 ff. 571 ff.

[709] Th. 2, S. 451 ff.

[710] Vol. I. p. 164. But not merely in general do the investigations in Egyptian antiquities favor the belief that Moses was the author of the account in this tenth chapter of Genesis. On the Egyptian monuments, those especially which represent the conquests of the ancient Pharaohs over foreign nations, (conquests which certainly were oftener achieved in imagination than in reality, as indeed the almost regular recurrence of these representations under nearly all the ancient Pharaohs shows, so that nothing can be more erroneous than the present popular way of relying upon them, without inquiry, as sources of historical truth,) not a few names have been found which correspond with those contained in the chapter before us. We will here speak only of those where the agreement is perfectly certain. It must be allowed that far more still could be effected if our knowledge of hieroglyphics were not so very imperfect.^{[711] [711]} Wilkinson, Vol. I. 377.

Among the sons of Japheth, in Genesis 10:2, Meshech and Tiras are mentioned in close connection. Among the Asiatic nations which are represented on the monuments as engaged in war with the Egyptians, the Toersha also appear, according to Wilkinson.^[712] They are shown, indeed, among the nations who are said to have been conquered by the third Remeses. Their identity with Tiras is the less doubtful, since another nation, the Mashoash, is named along with them. These last Wilkinson^[713] designates as “another Asiatic nation who resemble the former in their general features and the shape of their beards.” The agreement between Meshech and Tiras on the one side, and Mashoash and Toersha on the other, is the less exposed to suspicion since Wilkinson did not think to place both in connection, as indeed in general, the present attempt at comparing the names of the people represented on the monuments with those found in Genesis 10, is the first.

[712] Wilkinson, Vol. I. 378.

[713] Wilk., Vol I. p. 379.

Among the sons of Japheth, in the same verse, Javan, the Ionians or Greeks, is mentioned. According to Rosellini,^[714] the Uoinim, the Ionians are found among others, in a symbolic painting, representing king Menephthah I. the 12th king of the 18th Dynasty as in the sight of Amon-re he slays one individual of each of the conquered nations. These^[715] same people were also mentioned on the monuments which belong to Thothmes V.^{[716] [714]} Vol. III. 1. p. 425.

[715] Vol. III. 1. p. 426.

[716]P. 210.

Among the sons of Gomer, the son of Japhet, consequently as a Japhetic nation, Riphat is mentioned in Genesis 10:3, probably identical with the Pouont or Fount who are represented on the monuments as engaged in war with the Egyptians, as early as the time of Amun-m-gori II, which the more recent chronologers place at about the year 1680 B. C.^{[717] [717]} See Wilk. 1. 374.]

Among the sons of Ham in Genesis 10:6, Cush is first mentioned. The Cush according to Wilkinson,^[718] are represented among the African people who are conquered by the monarchs of the eighteenth or nineteenth dynasty. “These,” (the Cush,) he remarks, “were long at war with the Egyptians; and a part of their country which was reduced at a very remote period by the arms of the Pharaohs, was obliged to pay an annual tribute to the conquerors.”^[719] According to Rosellini^[720] the victory of king Horus over the same people is represented on a monument at Selsilis. According to the same author,p. 420.]]⁶ they appear in the painting already referred to, among the nations conquered by Menephthah I. Eleven separate Cushite tribes are there mentioned in agreement with Genesis 10:7, according to which Cush is not the name of a separate tribe but of several tribes belonging to one general family.

[718] Vol. I. p 387.

[719] See also Champollion Briefe S. 105.

[720] III. 1. p 277 seq. As the second son of Ham, the second Hamitish head of a family, Mizraim is mentioned. This name was, as the dual form signifies, originally the name of the land. The division of the land into the upper and lower regions to which it refers, appears on the monuments even in the most ancient times. In proof of this see Wilkinson^[721] and Champollion’s Letters,^[722] where an inscription is quoted: “I give thee the upper and the lower Egypt in order that you may rule over them as king.”

[721] Vol. II. p. 73.

[722] S. 140.

According to Genesis 10:13, Mizraim was the progenitor among other nations, of the Lehabim and Naphtuhim. It serves for a confirmation of the statement that the Lybians (the Lehabim) are an offshoot from the Egyptians, that they even to the time of the Ptolemies were considered a part of the Egyptians. Champollion^[723] affirms that he found Niphaiat (=Naphtuchim) on the monuments as a name of Lybian nations.

[723] S. 124. The Canaanites and Amorites (called Asmaori) are represented on the Egyptian monuments with Lemanon^[724] (the people of Lebanon) and Ascalon.^[725] The land Canana is specifically named among the inscriptions upon a representation of the triumph of Menephtha I., together with the region of Nahareina or Mesopotamia and Singara or Sinear.^[726] In reference to a representation of a campaign of Osirei, the father of Remeses the Great, Wilkinson^[727] says: “The country of Lemanon is shown by the artist to have been mountainous, inaccessible to chariots, and abounding in lofty trees, which the affrighted mountaineers are engaged in felling in order to impede the advance of the invading army. The Egyptian monarch, having taken by assault the fortified towns on the frontier, advances with the light infantry in pursuit of the fugitives who had escaped and taken refuge in the woods, and sending a herald to offer terms on condition of their surrender, the chiefs are induced to trust to his clemency and return to their allegiance, as are those of Canana, whose strong-holds yield in like manner to the arms of the conqueror.” It is readily seen from these representations with what justice an argument against the Pentateuch has been derived from the knowledge of Canaan which its author exhibits.

[724]Wilkinson, Vol. I. p. 62, says: “The common custom of substituting m for 6 in Coptic, and the representation of a mountainous and woody country in which the chariots could not pass, convince me that this is intended for mount Lebanon.”

[725]Wilk. Vol. I. 385.

[726] See Ros. III. 1. p. 437, also upon Canana, p. 341.

[727] Vol. 1. p. 387.

“The sons of Shem,” it is said in Genesis 10:22, “are Elam and Asshur and Arphaxad and Lud and Aram.”

It is in the highest degree probable that Asshur appears on the monuments under the name Shan”. That the Shari, who especially under the reign of Osirei and his son Remeses the Great, are represented as engaged in war with the Egyptians, are the Assyrians, is indicated not only by the name but by the similarity of dress between them and the captives of Tirhaka.^{[728] [728]} Wilk. I. p. 375-6. Compare also Champollion, S. 105. The Ludim act a conspicuous part on the Egyptian monuments. In a representation of a triumph of Menephthah I. five foreign nations are found, the Romenen, the Scios, the people Ots from the land of Omar, the Tohen and the Sceto. All of these with the exception of Ots are represented in the inscriptions as belonging to the land of Ludim. And of the whole expedition it is repeatedly said, that it was directed against the people of the land of Ludim, which is in accordance with the book of Genesis, in which likewise, Lud is not represented as a single tribe but as an entire nation. Since in these same inscriptions the land of Canana is also named and the region of Nahareina and Singara, just as in Genesis Lud is closely connected with Aram, Rosellini^[729] argues that the land Ludim lay in the neighborhood of Canaan and Mesopotamia, and he asserts that it must be sought in the western part of Asia.

[729] III. 1. p. 437-8.

Abraham and Sarah in Egypt, Genesis 12. In Genesis 12:14-15 it is said: “And it came to pass, that when Abraham came into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman that she was very fair. The princes of Pharaoh also saw her and commended her before Pharaoh, and the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house.”

Sarah must therefore have been unveiled.^[730] The monuments show that according to Egyptian customs she could only so appear in public. “We find from the monuments,” says Taylor,^[731] “that the Egyptian women in the reign of the Pharaohs, exposed their faces and were permitted to enjoy as much liberty as the ladies of modern Europe. But this custom was changed after the conquest of the country by the Persians.”

[730]A passage from Gliddon’s Ancient Egypt, p. 48, is worthy of insertion here, not only from the light which it throws upon this section and the one contained on pp. 25-6, but also from its general interest in relation to the state of society among the ancient Egyptians: “There was no Salic law in Egypt; and in a country where females were admitted to a full participation in all legitimate privileges with man—where women were queens in their own right—royal priestesses from their birth; and otherwise treated as females are, in all civilized and Christian countries, there were none of those social restrictions that elsewhere enslaved the minds, or constrained the persons of the gentler sex. We have the most positive and incontrovertible evidence, in a series of monuments coeval with Egyptian events for 2500 years, to prove that the female sex in Egypt was honoured, civilized, educated, and as free as among ourselves; and this is the most unanswerable proof of the high civilization of that ancient people. This is the strongest point of distinction between the Egyptian social system of ancient times, and that of any other eastern nation. Even among the Hebrews, the Jewish female was never placed in relation to man, in the same high position as her more happy and privileged sister enjoyed in Egypt.”

[731]P. 4. The recognition which Sarah’s beauty finds is more easily explained, if we take into the account that the Egyptian women, although not so dark as the Nubians and Ethiopians, were yet of a browner tinge than the Asiatics. On the monuments the women of high rank, in compliment to them were commonly represented with fairer complexions than their attendants.^[732]

^[732] Ibid. p. 4.The passage to which Hengstenberg refers is as follows: An aggravation of Abraham’s alarm arose from the complexion of his wife: “Thou art a fair woman.” Though the Egyptian ladies were not so dark as the Nubians and Ethiopians, they were of a browner tinge than the Syrians and Arabians: we also find on the monuments, that ladies of high rank are usually represented in lighter tints than their attendants, though we occasionally find some as dark as that which we have copied; but there is ample evidence that a fair complexion was doomed a high recommendation in the ago of the Pharaohs. This circumstance, so fully confirmed by the monuments, is recorded in no history but the book of Genesis, and it is a remarkable confirmation of the veracity of the Pentateuch. That Pharaoh is immediately thereupon ready to take Sarah into his harem appears not to be consistent with Herodotus B. 2, c. 92, according to which each Egyptian had only one wife.^[733] But that Herodotus speaks only of the common practice among them and that polygamy was there allowed by law, is shown by what Diodorus^[734] says: “Among the Egyptians the priests marry only one woman, but the rest of the men, each one as many as he chooses.” That polygamy was infrequent among the Egyptians is evident from numerous representations of domestic life on the monuments.^[735] But with their wives the noble Egyptians had also other inmates of the harem which were sometimes merely servants and sometimes also concubines; “most of them appear to have been foreigners, either taken in war or brought to Egypt to be sold as slaves.”^[736] Of this class are the women at Medeenet Haboo, attending upon Remeses, and not the wives of the monarch. The concubines were members of the family and were in rank next to the wives and children of their lord. Without doubt Sarah was intended for such a station. Among the gifts which Abraham received from Pharaoh, male and female slaves are mentioned, in Genesis 12:16. “Domestic slavery,” says Taylor,^[737] “seems to have been established in Egypt from the earliest ages, and we find from the monuments that the mistress of a mansion was very rigid in enforcing her authority over the female domestics. We see these unfortunate beings trembling and cringing before their superiors, beaten with rods by the overseers, and sometimes threatened with a formidable whip wielded by the lady of the mansion herself. Hagar was one of the female slaves obtained by Abraham at this time.” See upon slavery among the Egyptians, Wilkinson:^[738] “The Ethiopians were obliged to supply the Egyptians with slaves, which the Egyptians sometimes exacted even from the conquered countries of Asia.”

[733] This is clearly the meaning of the passage, and Bähr is entirely wrong in making it mean the opposite.

[734] 1. 80.

[735] Wilk. Vol. II. p. 62.

[736] Ibid. 64.

[737] p. 7.

[738] Vol. 1. p. 388.

Genesis 13:10. In Genesis 13:10, the author says the plain of the Jordan was everywhere well watered, “as the garden of the Lord (Paradise), like the land of Egypt.” Less wonderful is it here that the author understands the natural condition of Egypt than that just this same land presents itself to him directly as a means of comparison.^[739]

^[739] There is no ancient nation in which horticulture received anything like the same attention that it did in Egypt; the garden seems to have been an object of greater care than the house; in almost every representation of a banquet, we find that flowers were regarded as the chief ornaments, and fruits as the principal delicacies. While the operations of the farmer were confined to the brief seasons of sowing and harvest, the cares of the horticulturist appear to have been incessant. From the total disregard of perspective in the paintings and bas-reliefs, the representations of Egyptian gardens are very confused, and at first suggest very few ideas of beauty. A closer examination proves that their pleasure grounds were laid out in what used to be called the Dutch style, which was so fashionable in England about a century ago. The flower-beds are square and formal; the raised terraces run in straight lines; arbours of trellis-work occur at definite intervals, covered with vines and other creepers, which it is difficult to identify. Some of tho ponds are stored with water-fowl, and others with fish. Vegetables are depicted in great variety and abundance. It is indeed impossible to look at any representation of an Egyptian garden, without feeling some sympathy for the complaints and murmurings of the Israelites in the desert. “The children of Israel also wept again and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat? We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlick; but now our soul is dried away, there is nothing at all besides this manna before our eyes.” (Numbers 11:4-6.) This attachment to gardens is frequently made the subject of poetical allusions in the Song of Solomon, which, though it has a much more high and holy signification, as both Jewish and Christian commentators unanimously agree, yet was primarily designed as an epithalamium on his marriage with a beautiful Egyptian princess, the daughter of the reigning Pharaoh. “A garden inclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring shut up, a fountain sealed. Thy plants are an orchard of pomegranates, with pleasant fruits; camphire, with spikenard; spikenard and saffron; calamus and cinnamon, with all trees of frankincense; myrrh and aloes, with all the chief spices; a fountain of gardens, a well of living waters, and streams from Lebanon.” (Cantic. 4:12-15.)

Exodus 20:25. In Exodus 20:25 it is said: “And if thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone; for if thou lift up thy tool upon it thou hast polluted it.” The preparation of hewn stone is represented in a tomb at Thebes—some workmen stand there smoothing the surfaces of a stone with chisels of different forms; others are examining to see whether it is perfectly square. The great skill of the Egyptians, in the preparation of hewn stone, is one of the principal causes of the durability of the Egyptian monuments.^{[740] [740]} Rosellini II. 2. p. 159. The Festival of the Golden Calf, etc. Exodus 32 andLeviticus 17:7. A succession of allusions to Egypt are found in the 32nd chapter of Exodus. That the representation of Jehovah under the image of the golden calf is only explainable on the supposition of Egyptian influence, and that it stands in connection with the worship of Apis,^[741] has been fully discussed in the Contributions.^[742] In the same work, it was also shown that striking analogy is found in the descriptions of the feasts of the gods among the Egyptians, for the manner in which the festival of the golden calf was celebrated by the Israelites, as exhibited in the following passages: Exodus 32:6—”And the people sat down to eat and to drink and rose up to play.”Exodus 32:17 : “And when Joshua heard the noise of the people as they shouted, he said unto Moses, There is a noise of war in the camp.” Exodus 32:18, where Moses says: “The noise of song I hear.” And in Exodus 32:19 : “And he saw the calf and the dancing.” The most ancient popular rites of the Egyptians were, according to Creuzer,^[743] of the nature of orgies, and the fundamental character of their religion was Bacchanalian. Sensual songs were sung, with the accompaniment of noisy instruments. Of the yearly journey to Bubastis, Herodotus^[744] says: “Throughout the whole journey, some of the women strike the cymbal, whilst men play the flute, and the rest of the women and men sing and clap with their hands; and when they, in their journey, come near a town, they bring the boat near the shore and conduct as follows: some of the women do as I have already described, some jeer at the women of the town, with loud voices, and some dance,” while others commit other unseemly acts. Especially is it said concerning the feast of Apis^[745] “But when Cambyses came to Memphis, Apis (whom the Greeks call Epaphos) was shown to the Egyptians, and as he appeared, the Egyptians forthwith put on their most costly garments and exulted.”^[746]

^[741] Wilkinson connects it with the worship of the Mnevis of Heliopolis. After speaking of the worship of the sacred animals in general, he says: “The Hebrew legislator felt the necessity of preventing the Jews from falling into this, the most gross practice of which idolatry was guilty. The worship of the golden calf, a representation of the Mnevis of Heliopolis, was a proof how their minds had become imbued with the superstitions they had beheld in Egypt, which the mixed ’multitude had practiced there.’” Second Series, Vol. II. p. 96-7. But it is of little consequence which is referred to. The allusion is sufficiently plain in either case.

[742]Th. 2. S. 155 ff.

[743] Symbol. I. S. 448, 9.

[744] B. 2. c. 60.

[745] B. 3. c. 27.

[746] See also upon the sacred dance among the Egyptians, Wilk. II. p. 340.

Just as here, in a manner throughout inimitable by one of later times, the circumstances, tendencies and feelings of the people who had grown up under Egyptian influences, are exhibited with incontrovertible truth. So are they, also, in the passage Leviticus 17:7, already explained at large in a former work.^[747] It is there said, in reference to the rebellious Israelites: “They shall no longer offer their sacrifices to he-goats (שְׂאִירִם), after which they have lusted.” The opposition which exists between a he-goat and a god, was removed in the Egyptian religion and in it only. “The he-goat, and also Pan, were, in the language of Egypt, named Mendes,” says Herodotus,^[748] and almost all the Greeks follow him. This identity of names between the god and the he-goat is explained by the pantheistic element in the Egyptian conception of the world. The he-goat was not barely a symbol of Mendes, for whom the Greeks, looking away from the other great differences, because of the form of the he-goat and his wantonness, substituted Pan, but the physical presentation, the incarnation of this god, and was therefore considered holy and as worthy of divine honor. The service of the he-goat, as a deity, was very anciently performed in Egypt, and he was the participant of very high honor among them,^[749] that we must necessarily expect the idolatrous inclination of the Israelites awakened after a short slumber, to be also directed specially to this deity.

[747]In den Beilragen, Th 2. S. 118 ff.

[748] B. 2. c. 46.

[749]Compare Creuzer, Th. III. S. 325. so

We turn back to Exodus 32 Aaron demands, according to Exodus 32:2, of the children of Israel, the golden rings which are in the ears of their wives, their sons, and their daughters, in order to fashion from them the calf. “The golden ornaments found in Egypt,” says Wilkinson,^[750] consist of rings, bracelets, armlets, necklaces, ear-rings and numerous trinkets belonging to the toilet; many of these are of the times of Osirtasen I. and Thothmes III., contemporaries of Joseph and Moses.” The same author^[751] shows that ear-rings were commonly worn in Egypt. Rings of gold were so common in Egypt, according to Rosellini,^[752] that they took, to a certain extent, the place of coin, and many times were used in trade.

[750] Wilk., Vol. III. p. 225.

[751] Vol. III. p. 371-1.

[752] Vol. II. p. 280.

According to Exodus 32:20, Moses took the calf that they made and burned it and beat it,^[753] (namely, the elements of the calf, externally gold and internally wood, which had escaped the fire) until it was fine as powder. In Deuteronomy 9:21, Moses says of the same transaction: “And burned it with fire, and beat it, grinding it thoroughly, until it was as fine as dust.” Wilkinson^[754] says, certain persons were employed in the towns of Egypt, to pound various substances, in large stone mortars, with heavy metal pestles. When the substance was well pounded, it was taken out and passed through a sieve, and the larger particles were again returned to the mortar, until the whole was sufficiently fine.

[753] In Wilkinson, Vol. III. p. 220-1, it is said: “A strong evidence of the skill of the Egyptians in working metals, and of the early advancement they made in this art, is derived from their success in the management of different alloys; which, as M. Goguet observes, is further argued from the casting of the golden calf, and still more from Moses being able to burn the metal and reduce it to powder; a secret which ho could only have learned in Egypt. It is said in Exodus that ‘ Moses took the calf which they had made, and burned it in the fire and ground it to powder, and strewed it upon the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it;’ an operation which, according to the Frenchsavant,’ is known by all who work in metals to be very difficult.’ ‘Commentators’ heads,’ he adds, ‘have been much perplexed to explain how Moses burnt and reduced the gold to powder. Many have offered vain and improbable conjectures, but an experienced chemist has removed every difficulty upon the subject, and has suggested this simple process. In the place of tartaric acid, which we employ, the Hebrew legislator used natron, which is common in the east. What follows, respecting his making the Israelites drink this powder, proves that he was perfectly acquainted with the whole effect of the operation. He wished to increase the punishment of their disobedience, and nothing could have been more suitable; for gold reduced, and made into a draught, in the manner I have mentioned, has a most disagreeable taste.’”

[754] Vol. III. p. 181 and Drawing. In Exodus 32:32, Moses asks of God: “And now if thou wilt, forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written.” These words imply the customary employment of lists and rolls, which have existed in scarcely any other land so generally as they did in Egypt. The monuments often exhibit this frequency. Thus there is represented in a tomb at Gurnah a levying of Egyptian soldiers. The men, conducted by their commander, go before a scribe in order to be enrolled.^{[755] [755]} Rosellini, H. 3. p. 218. Compare also Herod. B. 2. c. 177.

Prohibition of Marriage Between Near Relatives. Leviticus 18. The law concerning unlawful intercourse, in Leviticus 18, in which marriages between near relatives occupies the first place, is in Leviticus 18:3 accompanied by the words: “After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do.” Truly, among no people of antiquity was the moral feeling, with reference to marriage among relatives, so blunted, as among the Egyptians. The marriage with the sister, so strongly forbidden by Moses, was considered among them as unconditionally allowable. Diodorus^[756] says, “It is, contrary to the common custom, lawful among the Egyptians to marry a sister, since such a union, in the case of Isis, was so fortunate in its consequences.” Pausanias^[757] says of Philadelphus, who married his sister by birth: “He in this did that which was by no means lawful among the Macedonians, but entirely in accordance with the law of the Egyptians, over whom he ruled.” Philo^[758] relates of the Egyptian lawgiver, that he gave permission to all to marry their sisters, those who are sisters by birth, not less than step-sisters, those of like age and older, not less than the younger. “By the sculptures in Upper and Lower Egypt,” remarks Wilkinson,^[759] “it is fully authenticated, that this law was in force in the earliest times.”

[756] B. I. c. 27.

[757] Att. 1. 7.

[758] De Special Legg. p. 780.

[759] Vol. II. p. 63.

Defilement with Animals.Leviticus 18:23,Exodus 22:18, etc. The prohibition of defilement with animals is in the Pentateuch so often repeated and so rigorously enforced, (see Leviticus 18:23 : Neither shall thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith, neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto; it is confusion, תֶּבֶל),^[760] that we are involuntarily driven to the supposition, that the author has a very special reason for enjoining the prohibition of this so unnatural and infrequent a crime, and that he takes into account an immorality which ruled among those by whom the Israelites had been previously surrounded, which was introduced among them through a pseudo-religious motive, and had acquired an influence which it could never have exerted without that sanction. We should the more expect to find such a vile practice among the Egyptians, the further erroneous views of the position of animals in the whole creation and the changing of the proper relation of animate to human beings, was carried. That this enormity really existed among the Egyptians,” Herodotus^[761] shows: “In this same province (the Mendesian) the following prodigy happened in my time: ἐγένετο δʼ ἐν τῷ νομῷ τούτῳ ἐμεῦ τοῦτο τὸ τέρας· γυναικὶ τράγος ἐμίσγετο ἀναφανδόν. τοῦτο ἐς ἐπίδεξιν ἀνθρώπων ἀπίκετο.”^[762] That the occurrence which Herodotus here mentions was not a single one, is evident from the declarations of other writers.^{[763] [760]} See alsoExodus 22:18,Leviticus 20:15,Deuteronomy 27:21.

[761] 2. 46.

[762] Bähr says upon this passage: Mendetis in urbe hircos mulieribus se miscere Pindarus quoque cecinerat (v. Strabo, 17. p. 1154), ex quo alii repetierunt laudati a Schneidero ad Pindari fragm. p. 122. ed. Heyn. t. 3. et Bocharto, Hieroz. 2, 53. Idem facinus de Thuiitis alii retulerunt, v. Clem. Al. p. 27. Ac turpissimi hujus amoris causam a religione repetendam esse, qua ductae mulieres Pani s. hirco, ejus symbolo, se permiserint, in dubium vocari nequit. The passage of Pindar quoted reads:Μένδηται παρὰκρηνὸν θαλάασσας ἔσχατον Νείλου κέρας αἰγιβάται ὅθι τράγοι γυναιξὶμίσγονται.

[763]See the preceding note. The reference of the Mosaic law on this subject to the irregularities connected with the worship of the goat among the Egyptians, appears the more certain, since this worship of the goat among the Israelites, according to the passage in Leviticus 17:7, already discussed, was during the passage through the desert yet very prevalent.

We are still more confirmed in our belief of an Egyptian reference in this prohibition of defilement with animals, from its being comprised in the number of those which in Leviticus 18:3 are introduced by the words: “After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do.”

Leviticus 24:10-12. The account of “the son of the Israelitish woman whose father was an Egyptian,” in Leviticus 24:10-12, transfers us, and in a manner peculiar and inimitable by a later writer, into the very heart of things as they must have existed at the time of the departure of the people from Egypt. If any narrative carries the proof of its authenticity along with it, this does. The name of the mother and her father are given, and the name of the tribe of the latter is also stated. That the father is an Egyptian and the mother an Israelite, is entirely in accordance with the common relation of the Egyptians to the Israelites, while the opposite case, an Israelitish father and an Egyptian mother, is hardly supposable. It is entirely natural that in the son of an Egyptian father, the heathenish blood should show itself, so that he curses the God of Israel.

Numbers 11:4. In Numbers 11:4 it is said: “The mixed multitude that was with them fell a lusting, and the children of Israel wept again, and said, who shall give us flesh to eat?” Numbers 11:5 : “We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the grass (helbeh), and the onions, and the garlic.” This passage is especially important, in respect to the connection of the Pentateuch with Egypt. All the things named in it certainly existed in Egypt in great abundance, and most of them were distinguished for their excellence; and among those means of subsistence, which ancient Egypt produced in great abundance, which were generally in favor with the whole people, and specially with them, there is no one omitted. Among those named, one is found, the grass (helbeh), which is so entirely peculiar to Egypt, that interpreters down to the latest times have erred in reference to it, since they fail to derive the explanation from accurate knowledge of Egypt. These peculiarities can appear natural to us, in this connection, only on the supposition that Moses is the author of the Pentateuch, but on that hypothesis they are entirely in accordance with the circumstances of the case.

We begin with that product, the naming of which is especially worthy of notice, and suited to convince us of the author’s knowledge of Egypt. The Grass (helbeh),חָצִיר. The current opinion, as it is found, for example, in Rosenmueller, upon this passage, and in Gesenius’ Thesaurus, same word, is this: חָצִיר means here, leek, which on account of its grasslike appearance takes this name. But this opinion is entirely without foundation. Appeal cannot be made to the authority of the ancient translators.^[764] For who can give us security, that they, supposing that all herbage used for fodder is excluded, and looking around among the productions which serve men for food, for one that at least furnishes an external similarity to grass, have not merely guessed at the one they have taken?

[764] Septuagint,πράσα, Vulgate, porri. But the correct view is arrived at through a different counterargument. The חָצִיר has etymologically the meaning of food for cattle—it is originally not grass, but pasturage, fodder,^[765] and so also according to common use.^[766] The first criterion for the correctness of the interpretation is, therefore, that the article of food which is identified with חָצִיר must be appropriately food for beasts, so that man goes, as it were, to the same table with them. Now if such an article of food could by no means be found, we should be warranted in giving up this criterion, which is entirely wanting in the leek.

[765] See Gesenius, loc. cit.

[766] E.g.1 Kings 18:5,Job 40:15, and other passages. Compare Gesenius. But among the wonders of the natural history of Egypt, it is mentioned by travellers that the common people there eat with special relish a kind of grass similar to clover. The impression which the sight of this makes on those who have travelled much, is very graphically described by Mayr:^[767] “A great heap of clover was thrown before the beasts, and a smaller pile of clover-like fodder was placed before the master of the house and his companions. The quadrupeds and the bipeds ate with equal greediness, and the pile of the latter was all gone before the former had finished theirs—this plant is very similar to clover, except that it has more pointed leaves and whitish blossoms. Enormous quantities are eaten by the inhabitants, and it is not unpalatable. I was afterwards, when hungry, in a situation to lay myself down upon the fields where it grows, and graze with pleasure.”

[767] Reise nach Aegypten u. s. w. S. 226.

Raffeneau Delile gives a more scientific description:^[768] “The fenu-grec (trigonella foenuni Graecum, Linn.) is an annual plant, known in Egypt under the name of Helbeh; it very much resembles clover. The people of the country find the young fresh shoots, before blossoming, a very delicious food.”

[768] Hist. des Plantes cultiv. en Egypte, § 2: Du Trèfle d’Égypte et du Fenu-grec, cultivés comme fourages, in the Description, t. 19, p. 59 seq. But the most particular and the best account is found in Sonnini.^[769] From him we make a somewhat copious extract, since it clearly shows us how the emigrating Egyptians and the Israelites could among other things also look back longingly to the grass of Egypt: “Although this helbeh of the Egyptians is a nourishing food for the numerous beasts who cover the plains of the Delta; although horses, oxen and the buffaloes eat it with equal relish, it appears not to be destined especially for the sustenance of animals, since the barsim furnishes an aliment better even and more abundant. But that which will appear very extraordinary is, that in this singularly fertile country, the Egyptians themselves eat the fenu-grec so much that it can properly be called the food of men. In the month of November, they cry, “Green helbeh for sale,” in the streets of the towns. It is tied up in large bunches, which the inhabitants eagerly purchase at a low price, and which they eat with an incredible greediness, without any species of seasoning. They pretend that this singular diet is an excellent stomachic, a specific against worms and dysentery; in fine, a preservative against a great number of maladies. Finally, the Egyptians regard this plant as endowed with so many good qualities that it is, in their estimation, a true panacea. Prosper Alpinus has entered into long details upon its use in medicine. After so many excellent properties, real or supposed, it is not astonishing that the Egyptians hold the fern-grec in so great estimation that according to one of their proverbs: Fortunate are the feet which tread the earth on which grows the helbeh.”

[769] Voyage dans la haute et basse Egypte, Tom. I. p. 379 seq.

Besides those named, von Schubert^[770] may be compared. He says: “The kinds of clover whose young shoots and leaves we saw eaten in many ways by the Egyptians, were the helbeh (trig. foenum, Gr.) and the gilban (Lathyrus sativus).”

[770] Reise, Th. II. S. 107. The Fish. The fact that fish were placed first in the narrative,^[771] and also the phrase: “which we ate in Egypt freely,” indicate that they were very numerous. And it is so well known that almost incredible numbers exist in Egypt, that we need not quote all the separate proofs of the fact. We only refer to Oedmann,^[772]Mayr,^[773]Bähr,^[774]Taylor,^[775] and Wilkinson.^[776] But it should, perhaps, be particularly mentioned that according to Herodotus a part of the inhabitants of the marshes of the Delta, shepherds, who probably were not of Egyptian origin, and were hated^[777] by the cultivators of the soil, lived entirely on fish.^[778]

^[771] We make the following extract from its interest, in connection with several other passages in the Pentateuch and Isaiah, as well as the one under discussion: “Fishing is one of the employments most frequently depicted on the monuments. It is combined with fowling by amateur sportsmen, and even with the chase of the crocodile and the hippopotamus; but is also pursued as a regular trade by an entire caste. It is recorded as a fearful aggravation of the first plague of Egypt, that ‘the fish that was in the river died,’ (Exodus 7:21). The first great complaints of the Israelites, when they murmured against Moses in the desert, was,’ We remember the fish that we did eat in Egypt freely,’ (Numbers 11:5.) And this abundance of fish was still further increased by the ponds, sluices, and artificial lakes which were constructed for the propagation of the finny tribe. Hence Isaiah, in denouncing divine vengeance against the Egyptians, dwells particularly on the ruin which would fall upon those who derived their subsistence from the animals and plants of the Nile: ‘And the waters shall fail from the sea, and the river shall be wasted and dried up. And they shall turn the rivers far away; and the brooks of defence shall be emptied and dried up: the reeds and flags shall wither. The paper reeds by the brooks, by the mouth of the brooks, and every thing sown by the brooks, shall wither, be driven away, and be no more. The fishers also shall mourn, and all they that cast angle into the brooks shall lament, and they that spread nets upon the waters shall languish. Moreover, they that work in fine flax, and they that weave net works, shall be confounded. And they shall be broken in the purposes thereof, all that make sluices and ponds for fish,’ (Isaiah 19:5-10). Although the Nile, and the artificial lakes, were constantly swept with nets, we are unable to discover any proof of the Egyptians having ever fished in the open sea; and indeed there is reason to believe that the fishes of the sea were, from religious motives, regarded with abhorrence. The supply has not failed in modern times; the right of fishery on the canals and lakes is annually farmed out by the government to certain individuals, who pay very large sums for the privilege. ‘The small village of Agalteh at Thebes,’ saysMr Wilkinson, ‘pays annually 1500 piastres (about £21.) to government for the fish of its canal.’M. Michaud, in his delightful Letters, gives an account of the fisheries on the lake Menzaleh, too interesting to be omitted. ‘The waters of Menzaleh abound in fish; the Arabs say that the varieties of fish in the lake exceed the number of days in the year. Although this may be deemed an exaggeration, it is certain that -whatever be the number of their species, the fishes of this Jake multiply infinitely.’ —’On the monuments the fishermen appear as a class inferior to the agricultural population, and we know historically that they formed one of the lowest castes. This was also the case in Palestine, and hence when Christ chose two of this class to become apostles, he announces to them that they were for the future to be engaged in a more honourable occupation. ‘Now as he walked by the sea of Galilee, he saw Simon and Andrew his brother casting a net into the sea, for they were fishers. And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after me, and I will make you to become fishers of men. And straightway they forsook their nets and followed him.’“—Taylor, p. 62, seq.

[772] Verm. Samml. I. S. 136. Radzivil says there: “We saw, to-day, about a hundred fishermen lying in the turbid waters of the Nile, and catching fish with their hands. Some of them came up with three fish—one in each hand and one in the mouth. The fish were an ell long, and of different kinds.”

[773] Mayr, S. 188.

[774] Zu Herodotus, I. S. 658.

[775] P. 62 seq.

[776] Vol. III. p. 63.

[777] See Bähr, l. c. S. 687; Heeren, S. 150.

[778] Minutoli stands entirely alone in his assertion, S. 406: “In fish the Nile is poor, as well in respect to numbers as in variety of species, of which there are not many.” Were this correct, we should despair of ever finding truth in history. But we will not trouble ourselves about that in anticipation. The Cucumber.

Upon the cucumber, also, we need not delay long. It is known that they exist in Egypt, and of peculiar excellence. They are large, of fine flavor, and very much eaten.^[779]

^[779] Compare the passage from Prosper Alpinus which has already been quoted by Rosenmueller; Forskal, Flora, p. 169; Description, t. 19. p. 109; De Sacy upon Abdollatiph, p. 125; and Abdollatiph himself, p. 34; Hartmann, Aeg. S. 180. The Melons,אֲבַטִּיחִים The melons are of very great importance to Egypt. The following passages from Sonnini,^[780] best show how they could become objects of general longing in the desert, where “The souls of the people were dry,” Numbers 11:6. But the species of fruit which, by its pulp and its refreshing water, best serves to moderate the internal heat which the climate generates, is the pastek or water-melon (cucurbita citrullus).^[781] The markets are filled with them, and they sell at so very small a price, that the poor as well as the rich can refresh themselves with their watery and sweet juice. They are a healthful nourishment, and useful in the climate where the heat makes the blood boil, and gives sharpness to the humors.”^{[782] [780]} Th. 3. S. 101.

[781] Aegyptiis battich Forsk. p. 75.

[782] See also Sonnini, p. 109; Abdollatiph, p. 35; De Sacy, p. 127 and 8.

Onions. The onions of Egypt are also far renowned and much praised. They are often represented in the sculptures.^[783] According to Arvieux,^[784] they are sweet and large, and taste better than those of Smyrna. Hasselquist^[785] protests that there are in the whole world none better. Herodotus shows that they were, in antiquity, frequently an article of diet of the people, and a common food of those who labored upon the pyramids.^[786] In what estimation they are now held, we see from Sonnini:^[787] “This species of vegetable is yet extraordinarily common in this country: it is the aliment of the more ordinary of the people, and almost the only food of the lowest class. Onions, cooked or raw, are sold in the streets and markets for almost nothing. These onions have not the tartness of those of Europe; they are sweet; they sting not the mouth unpleasantly; and they do not produce weeping in those who cut them.”

[783]Wilk. II. p. 373.

[784] Hartmann, S. 180.

[785] P. 562.

[786]B. a. c. 125.

[787] Tom. II. S. 66, 67. The Garlic.

Finally, the garlic, just as here, is spoken of by Herodotus, in connection with the onion, as a principal article of food, especially of the poorest classes.^[788]Pliny^[789] also speaks of the two in connection. Dioscorides describes the garlic among the plants of Egypt; and Rosellini^[790] thinks he has discovered it upon a painting in Beni Hassan. It is not now produced in Egypt;^[791] just as also other plants very abundant in Egypt in former times, especially the papyrus-plant, are now either entirely or almost entirely extinct.^[792]

^[788] “Among the lower orders, vegetables constituted a very great part of their ordinary food, and they gladly availed themselves of the variety and abundance of esculent roots growing spontaneously, in the lands irrigated by the rising Nile, as soon as its waters had subsided; some of which were eaten in a crude state, and others roasted in the ashes, boiled or stewed: their chief aliment, and that of their children, consisting of milk and cheese, roots, liguminous, cucurbitaceous, and other plants, and ordinary fruits of the country.Herodotusdescribes the food of the workmen who built the Pyramids, to have been the ‘raphanus or figl, onions, and garlic;’ yet if these were among the number they used, and perhaps the sole provisions supplied at the government expense, we are not to suppose they were limited to them: and it is probable that lentils, of which it is inferred from Strabo they had an abundance on this occasion, may be reckoned as part, or even the chief article, of their food.”—Wilk. II. 370.

[789] Hist Nat. 19.6: allium cepasque inter deos in Jurejurando habent Aegyptii.

[790] Vol. II. 1. S. 383.

[791] Sonnini, p. 68.

[792] What Michand says, tom. 8. p. 56, concerning the manner of living among the Fellahs in the Delta may be compared with this whole passage: “Rien n’ égale la sobriete de ce peuple: il soutient sa vie avec quelques herbes, des concombres, des oignons, un mauvais pain de dourah ou lentilles.

Numbers 17:2.

According to Numbers 17:2, Moses takes from each one of the twelve princes of the tribes of Israel a rod and writes their name thereon. The name of each person, Wilkinson,^[793] remarks was frequently written on his stick, instances of which I have seen in those found at Thebes.”

[793] Vol. III. p. 388.

Deuteronomy 6:9;Deuteronomy 11:20. The passages, Deut. Deuteronomy 6:9 : “And thou shall write them (the divine commands) upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates,” and Deuteronomy 11:20, imply that the custom of giving to houses inscriptions, was quite common among the people with whom the Israelites dwelt.^[794] According to the monuments, the name of the owner of a house among the Egyptians was not unfrequently written upon the lintels of the doors.^[795] “Besides the owner’s name,” says Wilkinson,^[796] “they sometimes wrote a lucky sentence over the entrance of the house for a favorable omen, and the lintels and imposts of the doors in the royal mansions, were often covered with hieroglyphics, containing the ovals and titles of the monarch.”

[794] See Beitr. Th. 2. S. 459.

[795] See engraving in Wilk. Vol. II. 102.

[796] Vol. II. p. 123-4, and concerning the inscriptions on the gates of the gardens, p. 144. The Diseases ofEgyptSevere.Deuteronomy 7:15;Deuteronomy 28:27;Deuteronomy 28:35;Deuteronomy 28:60,Exodus 15:26. In Deuteronomy 7:15 it is said: “And the Lord will remove from thee all sickness, and will put none of the evil diseases of Egypt, which thou knowest, upon thee.” A similar expression is also found in Exodus 15:26, “If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, and will do that which is right in his sight, and will give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians, for I the Lord am He who healeth thee.” In Deuteronomy 28:60 it is said: “And the Lord will bring again upon thee all the diseases of Egypt of which thou wast afraid, and they shall cleave to thee.” In Deuteronomy 28:27 and Deuteronomy 28:35 of the same chapter, erring Israel is threatened with the infliction of a sickness peculiarly Egyptian concerning which we have already in another connection made investigation.

All of these scattered passages agree in this, that Egypt in reference to diseases, is a very peculiar land, and is visited by them in a very special degree. The accounts of all those who have made the diseases of Egypt an object of particular attention, show that the author is right in this. Wagner^[797] in his Natural History of man, calls Egypt “a great focus of the diseases in universal history.” De Chabrol in his “enquiry concerning the customs of the modern inhabitants of Egypt,” of the most important diseases, says: “With an almost equable temperature and with an always serene sky, Egypt can have only a small number of diseases, but they are for the most part terrible.”^{[798] [797]} Th. II. S. 270.

[798] Description 7. p. 43 seq. § 8. The same author then speaks of single maladies, the plague, which is almost never wanting in Cairo, and particularly in Alexandria, the dysentery of which he says: “This disease causes great destruction among them and especially attacks the children, which it carries off in a frightful manner;” the diseases of the eyes with which one at least out of five individuals is afflicted, the small-pox which in Egypt is frightful and rages far worse than in Europe, etc. In the “observations upon several diseases which attacked the soldiers of the French army,” four seasons of the year are made^[799] with reference to healthfulness. The first comprises the time of the inundation, “I name,” says the author, “this first season of the year which continues about three months, the damp season; it may be considered as the winter of the country. The west wind which then blows, increases the dampness of the atmosphere which at evening and especially in the morning is full of mist. The consequence is a coolness which is uncomfortable and detrimental to animal secretions. In this season of the year diseases of the eyes, the hospital fever, diarrhoea and catarrhal pains prevail.”^[800] “The third season of the year says the same author further, “which I will give the name of the sick season, since it is destructive to the health of the inhabitants and especially of strangers, begins about the first of March and continues generally until about the end of May. The south wind takes the place of the east wind which had prevailed during the earlier part of the year. These south winds are first light but they increase gradually—they afterwards decrease in the same way—and indeed to such a degree that during a period of about 50 days, from which they have taken the name chamsin, they are very violent and hot, and hence would become insupportable, if they blew without cessation. At this season of the year wounds heal with difficulty, and are easily seized with mortification. Sicknesses of all kinds take an unusual character and require the greatest carefulness on the part of the physician, and in general all living beings are more or less affected.”^{[801] [799]} In the Descr. t. 13, p. 216 seq.

[800] Of this same time says Abdollatiph, p. 4. De Sacy: During this season of the year unhealthful evaporations prevail; the air is bad— putrid diseases, caused by bilious and phlegmy humors, rage among the inhabitants.

[801] Compare also upon the diseases of Egypt Prosper Alpinus, De Medicina Aeg. ed. Friedreich, t. 1. p. 95 seq.: De morbis Aegyptiis peculiaribus eorumque causis; and Hartmann, AegypL S. 54 ff, where blindness is designated as the most to be feared of any of them. Volney found among 100 persons who met him, oftentimes twenty entirely blind, ten blind with one eye and twenty others whose eyes were either red or festered or diseased in some other way.

Cultivation of the Land inEgyptand Palestine,Deuteronomy 11:10-11. In Deuteronomy 11:10 and Deuteronomy 11:11 it is said: “For the land whither thou goest in to possess it, is not as the land of Egypt, from whence ye came out, where thou sowedst thy seed, and wateredst it with thy foot as a garden of herbs: but the land whither ye go to possess it, is a land of hills and valleys, and drinketh water of the rain of heaven.” These verses furnish occasion for the following remarks:

1. The supposition that Egypt is without rain lies at the foundation of this passage. Against the correctness of this implication, the accounts of modern travellers cannot be adduced in argument, according to whom, especially in Lower Egypt it certainly sometimes rains; for these rains are yet proportionally so seldom and, what is the principal thing, to which reference is made in this immediate connection, they have so little influence in fertilizing the earth, that the classical writers are accustomed to speak of Egypt as if it never rained there. Herodotus^[802] says perfectly plainly, “it rains not in their land.”^[803] Collections concerning rain in Egypt are given by Faber,^[804]Nordmeier^[805] and Hartmann.^{[806] [802]} B. 2. c. 14.

[803] Compare Diod. 1. 41. Plinius Panegyr. c. 30: Aegyptus alendis augendisque seminibus ita gloriata est, ut nihil imbribus coeloque deberet. Mela names Aeg. expers imbrium. Lnoilins in Seneca, Nat. Quaest IV. 2: Nemo aratorum aspicit coelum, and Tibullua: nec pluvio supplicat herba Jovi.

[804] Zu den Beob. a. d. Orient, B. 1. S. 4 ff. 2. S 347 ff.

[805] In the Calend. Aeg. p. 11 and 20.

[806] S. 197.

2. The author in designating Canaan in opposition to Egypt, as a land of mountains and valleys, places in the flatness of country of Egypt the cause of absence of rain, and that he in this way proves himself acquainted with the natural condition of Egypt no man can deny.^[807]

^[807] Vossius upon Mela L. 1. c. 9. § 1. ed. Tzschuck. III. 1. p. 247. says: Quaerit vero causum Aristobulus apud Strabonem 1. 15. (p. 476 s. 692.) quare, cum in Syene imbres cadant, intermedia tantum loca pluvia omnino careant. Quaestio haec ibi proponitur, sed non solvitur. Ratio tamen est manifesta, quia nempe illa Aegypti pars, ubi nullae cadunt pluviae, plana, humilis, sicca, arenosa ac calida est admodum, utpote torridae zonae vicina. Vapores itaque, qui a terra arida egrediuntur, cum rari admodum et tenues sint, aut noctu decidunt in rorem mutati, aut toti ab aestu consumuntur, priusquam in pluviam abeant. At vero tractus Syeniticus, quia excelsus et montosus est, nessessario pluviis abundat. Ubi enim montes, ibi nivium et aquarum lapsus perpetui.

3. It appears at first view remarkable that the author represents it as a superiority of Canaan over Egypt, that it is subject to rain, and is not watered by a river. If we compare what Herodotus^[808] says of the inhabitants of the region below Memphis, the thing will assume quite another phasis. “For now indeed these people obtain the fruits of their land with far less trouble and labor than other people, even than the other Egyptians. They need not trouble themselves to turn up furrows with the plough, nor to dig with the hoe, nor with any other kind of labor, which men bestow upon the earth, but the river comes of its own accord upon their land and waters it, and having done this, it leaves it again, and then each one sows his ground.” The great facility of cultivation in Egypt is also asserted by Rosellini.^[809] But if we examine the affair more minutely, it appears that the author is perfectly right, and that the error, if it is altogether an error, falls rather on the side of Herodotus^[810] and those who take him as authority.

[808] B. 2. c. 14.

[809] II. 1. p. 288.

[810] Bähr upon Herodotus says: Herodoteis similia proferunt Diod. 1. 36., Columella II. 25., Athenaeus V. 8. Sed recentioris aetatis scriptores si audias, vix ulla invenitur terra, quae quo fructus ferat magis hominum opera indigeat quam Aegyptus. Quae cum ita sint, nisi erroris patrem historiae incusare velis, ejus verba non ad omnem Aegyptum erunt referenda, sed ad unam modo alteramve ejus partem, eximia agrorum fertilitate insignem.

First, it is to be remarked, that Herodotus particularly designates only those labors as unnecessary for the Egyptians, which in other lands precede seed-sowing. But in Egypt, the burdensome labor, the watering, begins not until after the seed is sown, and this circumstance is made very particularly prominent in our passage. That irrigation is really a very laborious employment, is confirmed by many witnesses. “Forskäl,” says Oedmann,^[811] “has shown that the cultivation of the land in Egypt requires more toil than one would imagine. The watering must be often repeated, and for that purpose the land is intersected by canals. These canals must be cleared out yearly, and sustained by hedges, etc. planted on their banks. And in Shaw,^[812] it can also be seen with what indescribable pains the water must be conducted through the numerous little channels, to furnish sustenance for the productions of the land, to say nothing of the various machines which are drawn by buffaloes, and are used for carrying up the water to the gardens, after the canals and cisterns are dry.” The difficulty of cultivation in Egypt Girard^[813] also asserts. A single ‘Feddan Doorah’ sometimes requires, according to him, a hundred days’ works of watering. Prokesch^[814] says: “The watering is indispensably necessary, and must be performed at stated intervals. It is the custom to water the fields in winter once in fourteen days, in the spring, if the dew falls sufficiently, once in twelve days, but in the summer once in eight days.” The same author describes^[815] the various machines for irrigation. Finally, Michaud^[816] says: “The labor of tillage is not that which most occupies the agricultural population here; for the land is easy to cultivate. The great difficulty is to water the fields; even the most robust of the Fellahs are employed to raise the water and perform the irrigation.”

[811] Verm. Beitr. 1. S. 126.

[812] Page 172.

[813] In the Descr. t. 17. p. 56.

[814] In den Erinnerung. Th. 2. S. 135.

[815] S. 137.

[816] Correspondence from the East, Vol. VIII. p. 54.

Further, it must not be overlooked, that Herodotus speaks only of a single region of Egypt, of that which enjoys the blessings of the Nile in the fullest measure. He explicitly contrasts the inhabitants of the region below Memphis with the rest of the Egyptians. But our passage has particularly in view that part of Egypt which was inhabited by the Israelites. This lay upon the borders of the desert, and the blessings of the Nile could be appropriated to them only by means of the greatest exertions.

Finally, it is to be considered that the Canaan of which the author speaks is in a manner an ideal land. It was never what it might have been, since the bond of allegiance, in consequence of which God had promised to give the land its rain in its season, was always far from being perfectly complied with.

4. That our passage is spoken in opposition to the boasting of the Egyptians, who looked down with proud pity upon all other lands, since these had no Nile, is probable from a comparison of Herodotus, 2. 13, which has a striking relation to our passage: “For when they heard that in all the country of the Greeks the land is watered by rain, and not by rivers, as in Egypt, they said, ‘the Greeks, disappointed in their brightest hopes, will sometimes suffer severe famine;’ which means, if God at some time shall not send rain, but drought, then famine will press upon them, for they can obtain water only from God.” This phrase, ‘only from God,’ which seems so terrible to the Egyptians, is here represented as a mark of favor to the people, which has God for its friend, and to which the eyes of the Lord its God are directed from the beginning until the end of the year, Deuteronomy 11:12.

5. The words: “Where thou sowedst thy seed and wateredst it with thy foot as a garden of herbs,” shows at least that the author was acquainted with the manner of irrigation in Egypt, and is most easily explained on the supposition that he was acquainted with the manner of life among the Egyptians by personal observation. At the first view, these words appear without doubt to have reference to an Egyptian watering machine described by Philo,^[817] with which they carried the water from the Nile and its canals into the fields. This machine, a wheel for raising water turned by the foot, is even now in use in Egypt. Nevertheless, since the authority of Diodorus, for the newness of the invention of this machine, scarcely sufficient of itself, (he mentions^[818] that it was invented by Archimedes,) is confirmed by the circumstance that this machine is not represented in the sculptures,^[819] whilst the machine, now most common for irrigation, the shadûf, is found even on very ancient monuments,^[820] it is most natural to refer the words rather to the carrying of the water in which the foot has the most to do.^[821] This process we find also represented on the Egyptian monuments.^[822] Two men are there employed in watering a piece of cultivated land. They bear upon their shoulders a yoke with straps at each end, to which earthen vessels are fastened. They fill these with water from a neighboring shadûf or from a pool, and carry it to the field. Another stands there with a bundle of herbs which he appears to have just collected, by which the phrase, ‘like an herb-garden,’ is very naturally suggested.

[817] De Confusione Ling. p. 255.

[818] I. 34. 5. 37.

[819] Wilk. II. p. 5.

[820] Wilk. I. p. 53. II. p. 4. Ros. II. 1. p. 385.

[821]This does not reach the point, since the passage in question does not seem to refer to the mode of distributing, but of supplying the water. “Possibly,” saysDr Robinson,1. 542, “in more ancient times the waterwheel may have been smaller, and turned not by oxen, but by men pressing upon it with the foot, in the same way that water is still often drawn from wells in Palestine, as we afterwards saw.Niebuhrdescribes one such machine in Cairo, where it was calledSâkieh tedûr bir rijl,‘a watering machine that turns by the foot,’ a view of which he also subjoins.” The testimony in regard to the severity of the labour of irrigation is uniform.Lane,Modern Egyptians, Vol. II. p. 24, speaking of the raising of water by the Shadûf, says, “The operation is extremely laborious.”Dr Robinson,p. 541, also remarks: “TheShadûfhas a toilsome occupation. His instrument is exactly the well-sweep of New England in miniature, supported by a cross-piece resting on two upright posts of wood or mud. His bucket is of leather or wicker-work. Two of these instruments are usually fixed side by side, and the men keep time at their work, raising the water five or six feet. Where the banks are higher, two, three, and even four couples are thus employed, one above another.”

[822]See the engraving from Beni Hassan in Wilk. II. p. 137, and the descrip. in Ros. II. 1. p. 382-3.

6. The whole passage transfers us, in a manner inimitable by a modern writer, to the time in which the Israelites were stationed midway between Egypt and Canaan, yet full of the advantages which they had enjoyed in the former land, and in want of a counterpoise to the longing desire for that which they had lost.

Deuteronomy 17:16.

Among the precepts for the king, Deut. Deuteronomy 17, it is said, Deuteronomy 17:16 : “Only he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, so that he may multiply horses; for the Lord hath said to you: Ye shall not return back again that way.” It was shown in the Contributions,^[823] that the apprehension here spoken of, that the love of horses in the king could finally cause the whole people to return to Egypt, was entirely natural in Moses’ time, when a uniting of the band just now severed appears not impossible, when the people from the most trivial cause uttered their longing for Egypt, or even their determination to return,^[824] but not natural in the period of Solomon and the later kings. Indeed, such a thing could not even have been in Joshua’s time, when the people had come to a full consciousness of their national independence, and every thought on the possibility of a reunion with the Egyptians was obliterated. In the same place it was also remarked, that Egypt also appears in this passage as the only country in which horses were raised, while indeed in the age of Solomon, Palestine was to a certain extent distinguished for the same thing, so that it could no longer be supposed that a king who wished to be the possessor of many horses must go to Egypt.

[823]Th. 3. S. 247-8.

[824] SeeExodus 14:11.Numbers 11:5seq. 21:5, 7.

Kind Treatment of the Israelites by Individual Egyptians,Deuteronomy 23:8(7). In the arrangement concerning those who are to be received into the congregation, and those who are to be excluded, in Deuteronomy 23:8(Deuteronomy 23:7), it is said: “Thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian, because thou wast a stranger in his land.” This passage implies that the Israelites received in some respects better treatment from individuals of the Egyptians separately, than from the State, so that the Israelites had cause for grateful regard to them in turn; since the phrase, “For thou wast a stranger in his land,” is not a sufficient reason for the command, “Thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian,” unless it means that the Egyptians performed the offices of hospitality to the Israelites, and earned for themselves the claim of reciprocity. In accurate agreement with this, we read in Exodus that God gave the Israelites, as they were departing, favor with the Egyptians, turned their hearts to them in love and compassion, so that they gave them rich presents for their journey. The agreement in so nice a circumstance between passages so entirely disconnected, is worthy of notice, as also the contents of each passage by itself. It is natural in a representation drawn from acquaintance with the actual condition of things, that the contradictions which real life always furnishes, should come in for a share; a mythic representation, on the contrary, would certainly avoid this apparent contradiction, and would here leave to the Egyptians only hatred and hostility and a correspondent relation of the Israelites to them.

Deuteronomy 23:12-13. The precepts upon the not defiling of the camp, etc., in Deuteronomy 23:12-13, reminds us of what Herodotus^[825] says of the Egyptians: “They εὐμαρέῃ χρέωνται in houses, and eat without, in the streets; for they think that things which are unseemly, but necessary, must be done in secret; but what is not unseemly, before all the world.”^[826] If a custom of this kind had been established among the Egyptians, from among whom the Israelites came, it could not be violated by the Israelites without offending against decorum, and the law comes in with its mandates to obviate this difficulty.

[825] B. 2. c. 35.

[826] Compare Bähr concerning the varying custom among the Greeks, S. 557.

Threshing with Oxen,Deuteronomy 25:4. In Deuteronomy 25:4 it is forbidden to muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn. Both ancient writers^[827] and the monuments show that oxen were used in Egypt for threshing.^[828]Champollion^[829] says, in describing the subterranean apartment at Elkab (Elethya), which belongs to the reign of Remeses Meiamun: “Among other things I have myself seen there the treading out or the threshing of the sheafs of grain by oxen, and over the engraving may be read, in almost entirely phonetic characters, the song which the overseer sings while threshing:

[827] See Bähr upon Herodotus I. p. 508.

[828]Wilkinson,in his 2d Ser., Vol. I. p. 85, seq. gives engravings and a description of this same scene at Elethya. His interpretation of the hieroglyphics differs, however, a little from the one in the text, which is taken from Gliddon: “Thresh for yourselves, (twice repeated,) O oxen, thresh for yourselves, (twice,) measures for yourselves, measures for your masters.” The same author also remarks, that similar songs may be found on the sculptured tombs of Upper Egypt.—In this same connection, it is said, that wheat and barley were abundantly cultivated in every part of Egypt, and that the former was harvested in about five and the latter in about four months after sowing. CompareExodus 9:31-32, from which it appears that the plague did not smite the wheat, because it was later; and also p. 119 of this volume. InGenesis 41:22, we read, “seven ears came up in one stalk.” Among the kinds of wheat in Egypt, according toWilkinson,uthe seven-eared quality “may be mentioned “It was cropped alittlebelow the ear;” hence the Israelites could obtain straw or stubble for their brick, from the fields, when it was not furnished by their task-masters.

[829]Briefe, S. 

“Tread ye out for yourselves, Tread ye out for yourselves,

O oxen!

Tread ye out for yourselves, Tread ye out for yourselves, the straw; For men, who are your masters, the grain.” Of this same representation at Elethya, Rosellini^[830] says: “They make a great heap of ears in the midst of the threshing-floor, and cause them to be trodden out by six oxen, which are kept in constant motion by a man who goes behind with a whip.” In regard to the signification of the hieroglyphics, Rosellini agrees with Champollion.

[830] II. 1. p. 308.

Deuteronomy 28:56. In Deuteronomy 28:56, the “tender and delicate woman” is mentioned, “who would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and tenderness.” Here also we are reminded of the state of things in Egypt. The luxury of the Egyptian women exceeded that of all other nations.^{[831] [831]} Taylor, p. 173, 4.

Deuteronomy 5:15;Deuteronomy 4:20;Deuteronomy 6:20seq. 7:8, etc. In numerous passages of Deuteronomy, the Israelites are admonished to keep the law by reminding them of their sad condition in Egypt, and the favor shown in bringing them out—a motive which implies that the consciousness of this condition and this favor was yet entirely fresh and lively. In Deuteronomy 5:15, after it had been said that the rest of the Sabbath shall be granted to the servant, it is added: “And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence.” In the same verse is the duty of keeping the Sabbath holy, founded on the deliverance from Egypt. In Deuteronomy 24:18, after the order not to pervert the right judgment of the stranger or the fatherless, or take the widow’s garment in pledge, it is said: “But thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in Egypt, and the Lord thy God redeemed thee thence: therefore I command thee to do this thing.”^[832] Similar references are found indeed in the earlier books.^[833] That they are especially numerous in Deuteronomy, is explained from the preponderance of the admonitory element in the book; from the fact that it, more than the remaining books, (which present the law in its bare objectivity,) appeals to the heart of the Israelites, in order to bring the law nearer to it, which was one principal design of the book.

[832] Compare chap. 4:20, 6:20 seq. 7:8, 15:15, 16:12, 24:22.

[833] SeeExodus 22:20,Leviticus 19:34.

We have reached the limit of our inquiry. V. Bohlen, in his Introduction to Genesis,^[834] supposes that the knowledge of Egypt which is found in the Pentateuch, can be wholly explained from the intercourse between the Israelites and the Egyptians in the age of Solomon. But those Egyptian references with which he was acquainted, filled scarcely half a page,^[835] and indeed in order to explain these from later circumstances, he was obliged to labor by availing himself of a number of “mistakes and inaccuracies” with reference to Egypt, to bring counter-arguments for the later age of the narrator, and for his position out of Egypt. We have proved that these pretended “mistakes and inaccuracies” are just so many proofs of the ignorance of him who alleged them. We have also shown that the Egyptian references of the Pentateuch are beyond comparison more numerous and direct than was hitherto supposed.^[836] The unprejudiced critic henceforth will be obliged to recognize in the connection of the Pentateuch with Egypt, one of the most powerful arguments for its credibility and for its composition by Moses.

[834] S. 41.

[835] S. 54.

[836]InExodus 25:12, seq., among other directions with regard to the construction of the ark, it is said, “And thou shalt cast four rings of gold for it, and put them in the four corners thereof: and two rings shall be in the one side of it, and two rings in the other side of it. And thou shalt make staves of shittim-wood, and overlay them with gold. And thou shalt put the staves into the rings by the sides of the ark, that the ark may be borne with them.” And it is seen from1 Chronicles 15:2;1 Chronicles 15:15, that “the Levites bare the ark on their shoulders.” The similarity between this construction of the ark and the manner of moving it, and the procession of shrines among the Egyptians, is too striking to be passed unnoticed. “One of the most important ceremonies,” saysWilkinson,“was ‘the procession of shrines,’ which is mentioned in the Rosetta Stone, and is frequently represented on the walls of the temples. The shrines were of two kinds: the one a sort of canopy; the other an ark or sacred boat, which may be termed the great shrine. This was carried with grand pomp by the priests, a certain number being selected for that duty, who, supporting it on their shoulders by means of long staves, passing through metal rings at the side of the sledge on which it stood, brought it into the temple, where it was placed upon a stand or table, in order that the prescribed ceremonies might be performed before it. The stand was also carried in the procession by another set of priests, following the shrine, by means of similar staves; a method usually adopted for transporting large statues and sacred emblems, too heavy or too important to be borne by one person.”