facts, although it is a matter of conjecture how he beea.mo acquainted with the facts. The possible explanation is suggested in the notes, and it is clear.in any <l8S8 that no subsequent Jewish writer would be in a better position than Moses himself in this respect, while to regard it as a mere effo1t of the imagination creates s host of difficulties greater than those it solves. This part of the subject may be summed up by saying, that while the external evidence as to authorship Is indecisive, and only obliges us to believe that "the Law" was given by Moses, the internal evidence is strong that the Book of Numbers, like the preceding books, is substantially from the hand of Moses. The objeetion.s urged against this conclusion a.re either in themselves captious and unt.ensble, or a.re merely valid against particular passages. As to these, it may be fearlessly allowed that there a.re some interpolations by a later hand, that; portions have been revised, that the various sections would seem to have e:rleted separately, and to have been put together with little art, that some other material Jnay have been worked into the narrative, and that some of the legislation may perhaps be rather a later codification of Mosaic ordinances than the original ordinances themselves.
E. ON THB Tntl'TH OJ' mm BooL n may pei:haps seem that In surrendering the traditional opinion that in all this Book we have the ipsissima wr"6a written down. by Moses, we have given up it.a veracity. Such an inference, however, would be quite arbitrary. Nothing tums upon the question whether Moses wrote. a single word of Numbers, unless it be the list of marches, of which as much is expressly stated. Them is no reason for asserting that Moses was inspired to write true history, and that; -Joshua, e. g., waa not. The Books of Joshua, Judges, and Ruth are received as true, although we do not know who wrot.e them, and the Book of Judges at any mte is appa.rentlycompiled from fragmentary records. Even in the New Testa- ment we do not know who wrote the Epistle to the Hebrews; and we do know that there are p11S138.ges in the Gospel of St. Mark (eh. xvi. 9-20) and in the Gospel of St. John (eh. viii. 1-11) which were not writt.en by the evangelists to whom they have been traditionally assigned. The credibility of these writings (conaidered apart from the fact of their inspiration) turns mainly upon the question to whose authority the statements contained in them can be traced, and in a very minor degree to whose hand the present ammgement of them Is due. As to the fun, we have every reason to believe that the materials of the Book are substantially from Moses himself, whose knowledge and veracity are alike beyond suspicion. .As to the second, we have only to acknowledge the same ignorance as in the ease of the greater part of the Old Testament and of some part of the New Testament. It is, of course, open to any one to doubt or to deny the truth of theee records, but in order to show reason for dolng·so he mUBt not be content with pointing out some difference of style here, or some trace of a THE BOOK OF NUMBERS. xiii
later hand there, but he must bring forward some clear instance of error, some undeniable self-contradiction, or some statement which ie fairly incredible. The mere existence of a record eo oncient and revered, and the unmistakable tone of simplicity and straightforwardness which characterises it, give it a primA facie claim upon our acceptance until good cause can be shown to the contrary. If the early records of other nations are largely fabulous and incredible, no pre- sumption passes over from them to a record which on the face of it presents such utterly different featlll'es. It remains to examine candidly the only objection of a serious nature (apart from the question of miracles, which it is useless to consider here) which has been brought against the substantial truth of this Book. It ie urged that the figures set down as representing the numbers of Israel at the two censuses are incredible, became inconsistent, not only with the possibilities of life in the wilderness, but also with the directions given by- Moses himself. This is in truth a very serious objection, and there is much to be said for it. It is quite true that a population· of some 2,000,000 people, including a full proportion of women and children (for the males of that genera- tion would be rather under than over the average), would under any ordinary circumstances seem unmanageable in a wild and difficult country. It is quite true (and this ie much more to the point) that the narrative as a whole leaves a distinct impression upon the mind of a very much smaller total than the one given. It is sufficient to refer for proof to such passages as eh. x. 3-7, where the whole nation is supposed to be within hearing of the silver trumpet, and able to distinguish its calls ; eh. xiv., where the whole nation is represented as joining in the uproar, and therefore as included in the sentence; eh. xvi, where a similar scene is described in connection with the revolt of Korah; eh. :xx. 11, where the whole thirsty multitude is represented as drinking (together with their cattle) of the one stream from the smitten rock ; eh. xxi. 9, where the brazen serpent on a standard may be seen, apparently, from every part of the camp. Each one of these instances, indeed, if taken by itself, may be shown to be far from conclusive; but there ie such a thing as cumulative evidence-the evidence which arises from a number of small and inconclusive testimonies all pointing the same way. Now it can hardly be denied that all these incidents raise in the mind a strong impression, which the entire narrative tends to con- firm, that the numbers of Israel were much more moderate than those given. The difficulty, however, comes to B head in connection with the marching orders issued by Moses directly after the first census, and to that point we may confine our ottention. According to eh. ii. (as slightly modified afterwards-see on eh. x. 17) the eastern camps of ,fodah, Issachar, and Zebulun, containing more than 600,000 people, were to march first, and then the tabernacle was taken down and carried on waggons by the Gersbonims and Merarites. After them marched the southern camps of Reuben, Gad, and Simeon, more than 500.000 strong; and behind: :a:iv INTRODUCI'ION TO