The Pulpit Commentary — Joshua — Section 201

could not ha'<'e ventured to trnst himself eo interring the bones of Joseph (Gen. I. 25, far in the he1trt of a hostile country. But 26) in the piece of ground which Jacob wh, not' Gerizim was not more than bought of the sons of Hamor (Gen. xxxiii. twenty miles from Ai. The Canaanites, 19). (See Exod. xiii. 19). we arc told. were p1t11ic-strickcn at Joshua's Ver. 31.-As Moses the servant of the success. The Gibeonites were not disposed Lord commanded (see Exod. xx. 25 ; Deut. to offer any hindrance to his progress; on xxvii. 4, 5). Here, and in ver. 33, we the contrary, they he,stened to form an find the writer me.king an extmct from the alliance with him. And these solemn Book of Deuteronomy. As hns been before religious rites, pe1iormed by a people so said, the natural explanation is thnt the clearly under the protection of the Most Book of Joshua was written after the Book High. were more likely to increase than of Deuteronomy, and that the Book of lessen the awe felt by the surrounding Deuteronomy was written by Moses, or how tribes. The only difficulty is that the could Joshua he.ve carried out instructions women and children ('<'. 35) are expressly which had never been given? The Elohist, said to have gone thither also, and it seems Jehovist, and Deuteronomist theory sup- improbable that they, whom we ha'<'e sup- poses the compiler of the Book of J oshuo. posed to ha '<'e been left under a guard at to have done his work in so perfunctory a. Gilgal. should have been brought so far fashion, that it is quite possible for critics while the country was as yet unsubdued. living at a distance of three thousand yea.re And the difficulty is increased by finding and more to detect the various fragments of Joshua age.in at Gilgal in eh. ix. 6. But which his mosaic is constructed. He is so there is the hypothesis that this was another '<'oid of common sense as to have inserted Gilgo.l to fall back upon, and this (see note this narrative in ~ place so obviously un- on the passage just mentioned) is an ex- suitable that it involves a palpable contra- tremely probable one. The suggestion of diction to probability and common sense, many co=entators, that the passage bas and this when he could have placed it in a been transposed, is of course possible. We dozen other parts of the book where no can only lea-ce the difficulty unsolved, as such improbability would be involved. Yet, one which a fuller knowledge of the facts, in spite of the incredible car~lessness with could ...-e obtain it, would clear up at once. which he put his materials together, we e.J:e But we may be sure that if the passage were required to believe that " the Deuterono- an interpolation, some explanation would mist" had the foresight to insert the fulfil- have been given of the circumstances which ment of the command of Moses which he seem to us so perplexing. And on the ha.dinventedinDeut.xi. 26-30,xxvii.1-26; other hand we must remember that, as has and that in so doing he abbreviated the been already contended, the notion that the narrative so as to leave out many details of whole camp of Israel performed this journey his own invention. Now, under the sup- at a time when stupefaction had seized position of a later fabrication of supple- upon the Canaanitish tribes, though in- mentary observances to be imposed upon volving some amount of impossibility, is by the children of Israel, it is hardly probable no means impossible. (See also note on ver. that the account of the plaster with wh.jch 33). A number of extraordinary inter- the stones were to be plastered, and the pretations of this passage have been given. enumeration of the tribes a)id the curses, A favourite Rabbinical interpretation (see would be omitted, since by the hypothesis note on next verse) was that this altar was the object of the Deuterononiist was to erected on the very day on which the secure implicit obedience to the sacerdotal Israelites crossed the Jordan. This was of enactments he was inventing. But on the course a physical impossibility. Josephus, hypothesis of tbe genuineness of both writ- on the contrary, supposes that five years ings everything fits in naturally enough. elapsed before its erection, while Rabbi An altar of whole stones, over which no Israel, in the Jerusalem Talmud, thinks man hath lift up any Iron. As though to that it was deferred until after the expiration intimate (see Exod. xx. 25) that all should of fourteen years, and after the land bad be natural and spontaneous in the worship been di,ided. So Ma~ius in loc. In Mount of God, and tbat as little of human devising Ebal. Between it and Gerizim stood the should be introduced as possible. The altar city of Shechem, or Sychar, as it is called must be raised by man, but the principles in St. John iv. Gerizim was close to this of tbe worship must not be de!ise~ by him. city, as Judg. ix. (i, 7 and St. John iv. 20 This interpretation, however, 1s reiected by testify, as well as Deut. xi. 30, compared Calvin who thinks that all that was meant mth Gen. xii. 6. Dr. Maclear, in the was to' preclude the perpetual existence of 'Camuridge Bible for Schools,' suggests tbat the altar (though how the substitution of the Israelites took this opportunity of whole for hewn stones could effect this i~ ' OB. VIII, 80-86.] THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. 141