bolonging probably to the third century B.o., but relating to the times of Ra.mesas II., in which Ptah-nefer-Ka, having found the book which the god Thoth wrote with his own hand, copied it on a new piece of papyrus, dissolved it in water, and .J.rank it, with the immediate result that "he knew all that it contained" (vide •Records of the Past,' Vol. IV. p. 138). (2) The consecration of the Levites (eh. viii 7) finds a counterpart in the ablutions of the Egyptian priests, who shaved their heads and bodies every third day, and spa.red no pains to promote the clean- liness of their persone, bathing twice a. day and twice during the night, and per- forming a. grand ceremony of purification preparatory to their periods of fasting, which sometimes lasted from seven to forty-two days, or even longer (vide Wilkin- son's' Ancient Egyptians,' Vol. I. p. 181). (3) The notion that cont.ict with a. dead body communicated uncleanness (eh. Iix. 11) was not unknown to the Egyptians, who, according to Porphyry('De Abet.,' ii 50, quoted in •Spe!lker's Commentary'}, required their priest-s to shun graves, funerals, and funeral fea.ats. (4) The dainties referred to in eh. xi 6, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlick, were such a.a s.boUllded in ancient Egypt (cf. Herodotus, ii. 93, 125; Hengmnberg's 'Egypt and the Books of Moses,' eh. vii. pp. 208-214; Wilkinson's 'Ancient Egyptians,' Vol. II. pp. 23 sqq.). (5) The antiquarian statement in eh. xiii 22 a.bout the age of Hebron indicates an acquaintance with Egyptian history which was less likely to have been possessed by a foreigner than by one who was native born. Now, although it cannot be maintained that these allusions to Egypt and ita history demonstrate with mathematical certainty that Moses was the author of Numbers, it is yet a fair and legitimate inference that they are much more easily explainecl on that hypothesis than any other. 4. It may be noted that the Book of Numbers is not destitute of incidental and undesigned traces of having been composed in Mosaic times. (1) The mention of Arnon e.s the territorial boundary between Moab and the Amorites (eh. x.xi. 13), though cited by Bohlen ('Introduction,' Vol. L p. 70) as a geogre.phice.l anachronism under the mistaken impression that David first constituted the Arnon the northern limit of Moab, is in reality an indication that the Amorites had not then been dis- possessed by the two tribes and a half, or, in other words, that the clause was written while the lsro.elitish army was still upon the south bank of the river. (2) The circumstance that in eh. xx.xiv. a larger extent of territory was assigned to Israel tho.n they ever permanently occupied indirectly confirms the Mose.io authorship, since, as has been well remarked in the 'Speaker's Commentary,' "a historian of later times would hardly have ascribed to his people, without explanation or quali- fication, districts which in fact they did not possess," whereas "a romancer of such times, drawing an imaginary frontier, would certainly not have left out of it the l'onowned city of Damascus, especially after carrying his border line almost round this district, and in view of the fact that the city and its territory were in the dominions of David and Solomon, and afterwards of Jeroboam II." (Introduction, § 4). (3) The want of correspondence between the settlements of the two tribes and a half, as desoribed in oh. xxxii. 34-42, o.nd e.s actually held by them o.t a later period (Josh. xiii. 15-33), also points to a contemporary author, since a late writer would almost certainly have made the two to harmonise by constructing both pe.ssages in accordE>nce with existing fact. Thus the Book of Numbers, when faii:ly and dispassionately interrogated, not only does not support the modern hypothesis of its being a late compilation from pre- existing documents, some of whioh had descended Crom primitive times, but the
b 3 :mi THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE BOOK OF NUMBERS.
majority of which were only the praiseworthy endeavours or subsequent ages to preserve the national traditions or the Beni-Israel from becoming extinct, bull abundantly warrants the etill popular belief, that while there is every probability that, like the rest of the Pent.ateuchal writings, it has been eubjected to one or more revisions, and may even have suffered interpolation in unimportant passages, euch ae eh. xii 3 (though this or oouree is not absolutely certain), yet in the main, and- imbstantially as we etill poesese it, it proceeded as an original composition from the baud of Moses. THE BOOK OF NUMBERS.
- INTRODUOTION. Tm: :Book of Numbers is a part of the Mosaic writings ordinarily called the Pentateuch. It would be more correct in a literary sense to say that it forms part of those records of the Deni-Israel which bring down the history of that peculiar people to the date of their victorious entry into their own land. The Book which follows is (on any theory as to its authorship) widely dissevered from the previous records in character and scope. The Book of Numbers forms the concluding fourth of a work of which the substantial unity and continuity cannot be reasonably questioned, and therefore very much which affects this Book is better treated of in an Introduction to the whole. The division, how· aver, which separates Numbers from Leviticus is more marked than that which separates Leviticus from Eiodus, or Exodus from Genesis. 'lhe narrative (which has been almost entirely suspended throughout the third Book) reappears in the fourth, and leads us on (with divers breaks and interruptions indeed) through the whole of that most important and distinctive period which we may call the fourth stage in the national life of the Beni-Israel. '.i, The first of these stages extends from the call of Abraham to the beginning of the sojourn in Egypt. The second includes the time of sojourning there.. _The third is the short but critical period of the exodus from Rameses to Mount Sinai, including the giving of the Law. The fourth reaches from Mount Sinai to the river Jordan, and coincides with the whole period of probation, preparation, failure, recovery. It will be noticed that our Book is the only one of the four which corresponds entirely to one of these stages ; it has therefore more real distinctness of character than any of the other three. A. ON THB CONTENTS OF THB BOOK. If we take the Book of Numbers as it stands, apart from any preconceived theories, and allow its contents to divide themselves into sections according to the actual character of their subject matter, we shall obtain, without any serious difference of opinion, the following result. Perhaps no book in the Bible falls more easily and naturally into its component parts. NOlllBEBS. • C Ii INTRODUCTION TO