« PreviousContinue »
prove that the new king and his people were foreigners. With the natural feelings of a conqueror, and with the superadded remembrance of a former expulsion from this very country, he anticipated a probable rebellion of the Mizraim; and he shrewdly conjectured, that while he was engaged in reducing them to obedience, or in resisting an invasion of the dethroned king from the Thebais, whither (according to Manetho) he had retired, the Israelites, compactly associated in the land of Goshen, would take him in the rear, and place him between two enemies.”—(Faber, vol. iii. p. 553.) Thus situated, the invaders thought it necessary to compensate for their disadvantages by their courage, their strict union, constituting themselves the sole military class, and ultimately, by reducing the Israelites, and also the native Egyptians (as we learn from both Manetho and Herodotus), to a state of absolute servitude, obliging them to labour in public works, which were probably undertaken quite as much in order to break their spirits by severe labour as for any other purpose.
11. "Treasure cities."-The original word has been variously rendered in the different versions. Store-cities, or store-houses, granaries, fortresses, or walled towns, are the alternatives. As the proper names seem to indicate that towns are intended, and as it is expressly said they were built for Pharaoh, it may be presumed that they were for the purpose of storing up the various produce which in different districts belonged to the king. The Hebrew kings had such store cities." (2 Chron. viii. 4. 6, and xxxii. 27-30.) Authors do not agree in fixing the sites of Pithom and Raamses; but as the land of Goshen is also called "the land of Rameses" (Gen. xlvii. 11), there is reason to conclude that the latter town was in that land, to which it gave or from which it received its name. Michaelis seems to think that the Egyptian government obliged the Hebrews, with the view of making them a more settled people, to relinquish their habit of living in tents. It is remarkable that the Vulgate has exactly the opposite view of the text, describing the two towns as urbes tabernaculorum, “cities of tents."
14. “Hard bondage, in morter, and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field.”—There has been no small amount of conjecture as to the works on which the Israelites were employed in Egypt. Some authors contend for one thing, and some for another: without sufficiently considering that the large expressions in the present text, together with "the treasure cities” of verse 11, and the straw-compacted bricks of chap. v. 7, would imply that they were employed in every kind of public work which was in those times undertaken. This was certainly the view of Josephus, who says that they were obliged to learn mechanical arts, and to accustom themselves to hard labour; and that they were made to cut canals, to raise dykes, to erect pyramids, and to build the walls of cities. The whole subject has generally been viewed with very unnecessary limitations. Thus it appears, from chap. v. 7, that when Moses commenced his mission, the Hebrews were chiefly occupied in making those large bricks, dried in the sun and compacted with straw, such as we have already noticed in describing the remains at Babylon; and it has hence been argued, that only such structures as are formed with such bricks could have been their work. It seems rather absurd, however, to conclude that because they were making bricks at the return of Moses from Midian, they had done nothing but make bricks during the eighty or hundred preceding years; for the oppression of the Israelites commenced before Moses was born, and he was about eighty years of age when he received the divine call to his great work. Hence old writers were wont to object to the statement of Josephus about the pyramids, "because the pyramids were all of stone." But all the pyramids are not of stone; and, if they were, that the Hebrews worked in brick is no reason why they should not also have worked in stone. However, we have so far entered into this view that we have given a cut of a principal brick pyramid, in preference-not because we are sure that this, or any existing pyramid, was the work of the Hebrews; but because, of all the existing monuments in Egypt, pyramids of this description may, with the greatest measure of probability, be attributed to them. Accounts of the pyramids in general are so common and easy of access, that we shall not occupy our space with any descriptive statement, but shall preferably endeavour to show on what data the Israelites may be conceived to have been engaged in their erection.
In a preceding note we have stated the probability that the oppression of the Israelites was under a dynasty of shepherd-kings-that is, a tribe or tribes of Cushite nomades, from Arabia or Chaldæa. If, therefore, we conclude that the Hebrews were employed on the pyramids, we must conclude that they were not native Egyptian structures, but were formed on the soil of Egypt by a foreign people. Of this it is a remarkable corroboration-that the pyramids are confined to that part of Egypt which the shepherd-conquerors occupied; whereas, we should rather expect to have found them, if native structures, in Upper Egypt, and in the vicinity of the "hundred-gated Thebes," the ancient and chief seat of the Egyptian religion and of the temples and monuments connected with it. Whatever were the objects of these remarkable structures, we can discover no reason but this, which adequately accounts for our finding them exclusively within a limited district. It is true that Herodotus does not assign such high antiquity to the pyramids; but he was not even aware of the existence of a dynasty of shepherd-kings: and, from his statement, it would seem that the priests of Heliopolis, from whom he derived most of his information, exhibited a degree of reserve about the period of their origin, and of concealment concerning the thraldom of their nation, which equally accounts for his ignorance of some remarkable facts, and corroborates the impressions we have stated. Their reserve was noticed even by Herodotus, though he had no notion of its cause. He does, however, state incidentally that some of the pyramids were called after the shepherd Philitis, who at that time fed his cattle in the neighbourhood; and he gives, as a reason for this, that the monarchs by whom they were built were held in such abomination by the Egyptians, that the priests were unwilling to mention their names. The reason was, that during their reign the Egyptians were subject to great oppression and calamity, and were not even permitted to worship in their temples. It is not difficult to discover, through the gloss which the priests gave to this statement, that the pyramids were erected under the rule of a foreign people, whose religion differed from that of the Egyptians, and who acted with great oppression. This inference is the stronger when we consider that the native Egyptian sovereigns could not, according to the organic laws of the government, have acted as the founders of the pyramids did; and, above all, could not have interfered with the public worship of the people: for the Egyptian kings were in general merely the adorned pageants of authority. The priests were the real sovereigns: they managed all the affairs of state; and all, even the smaller, movements of the monarch were subject to their direction and control. To this we may add, that various Arabian writers concur in the statement that the pyramids were built by a people from Arabia, who, after a period of dominion in Egypt, were ultimately expelled. There is every probability that although these shepherd-kings came immediately from Arabia, their original migration was from lands farther east; and it might not be impossible to track their progress by the pyramidal structures they have left in the lands they subjected to their rule. The Indian annals record a migration from the east of a race of Pali, or shepherds-(see the Philitis above-quoted from Herodotus): they were a powerful tribe, who in ancient times governed all the country from the Indus to the Ganges. Being an active, enterprising, and roving people, they, by conquest and colonization, spread themselves westward, even into Africa and Europe. They took possession of Arabia and the western shores of the Red Sea. We may connect this with another record of an ancient king, whose empire Vishnu enlarged by enabling him to conquer Misra-stan, or "the land of Egypt;" where his immense wealth_enabled him to raise three mountains-called Ruem-adri, the mountain of gold;
Rujat-adri, the mountain of silver; and Retu-adri, the mountain of gems. These "mountains" were no doubt pyramids, and probably derived their names, as Dr. Hales conjectures, from the colour of the stone with which they were coated. Some writers have thought that these allusions refer directly to the Israelites as the builders of the pyramids; we would rather understand them to refer to the shepherd-kings as the founders of the same monuments. Our line of argument is based on the previous notes. It being there rendered probable that a nomade dynasty ruled in Egypt during the bondage of the Israelites, we have now endeavoured to show the further probability that the pyramids were founded by them-not with the view of weakening the inference that the Hebrews worked on the pyramids, but in order to give that inference accumulated force; for if the shepherd-kings founded the pyramids, and if those kings ruled during the oppression of the family of Israel, not only a probability but a moral certainty results, that the latter were obliged to assist in their erection. We use the word "assist" advisedly; for there is no reason to suppose that they were exclusively engaged on any public work. They probably assisted the Egyptians, whose enslaved condition during the period in which the pyramids were erected is attested equally by Manetho and Herodotus. Some writers regard the pyramids in the abstract as evincing the slavery of the lower orders in Egypt. This proof may be considered to apply to the period in which the pyramids were actually erected; but it can hardly be taken to evince their condition under their own princes. That the mass of the people had their civil liberties much restricted there is reason to know; but that they were liable to compulsory and unpaid labour on the public works there is no ground to believe. If it were so, it would not have been mentioned as an outrage that the pyramid-founders reduced the Egyptians to servile labour. Prisoners and slaves would seem to have been generally employed in such labours; for it was the proud Foast of some of the princes, that no Egyptian hand had laboured in the greatest of their works. What masses were employed, and how profusely human life was wasted, is evinced by the statement in a previous note, that Necho worked away 100,000 lives in the attempt to cut a canal from the Nile to the Red Sea. Things are much the same now in the same country. Mehemet Ali, the Pasha of Egypt, obliged 150,000 men, chiefly Arabs from Upper Egypt, to work on his canal connecting the Nile with the sea at Alexandria: 20,000 of the number perished during the progress of the work. A new canal was in progress when Carne was at Alexandria. That writer says: "The bed of the canal presented a novel spectacle, being filled with a vast number of Arabs of various colours, toiling in the intense heat of the day, while their Egyptian (?) task-masters, with whips in their hands, watched the progress of their labour. It was a just and lively representation of the children of Israel forced to toil by their oppressive masters of old. The wages Mahmoud allowed to these unfortunate people, whom he had obliged to quit their homes and families in Upper Egypt, were only a penny a day and a ration of bread." (Letters from the East,' p. 71, 72.) Thus were the lives of the Israelites "made bitter with hard bondage." There is an incidental statement in Herodotus which enables us to discover that, even in point of remuneration for their labour, the builders of the pyramids were much on a par with the canal-digging Arabs of our own day. He mentions an inscription on the great pyramid, stating that a sum amounting to 1600 talents had been paid in supplying the workmen with garlic and onions. He then goes on to conjecture what, at that rate, must have been paid for the whole expense of tools, food, and clothing for the 100,000 men who were twenty years engaged in the work. It is observable that he says nothing of wages as a probable item of expense, but only calculates that they received food and clothing, the recompense of slaves, for their labour. This statement brings out another corroboration of the view we have taken. Garlic and onions are mentioned as having been supplied to the workmen; and although the circumstance would be of small weight as an isolated analogy, it does, after all that has been said, become important to remark that the Israelites, in one of their rebellious murmurings in the desert, speak with desire of the onions and garlic which they had eaten freely (that is, without expense) in Egypt. (Numb. xi. 5.)
The structure represented in our wood-cut, which is copied from the great French work on Egypt, represents a pyramid of sun-dried brick in Faioum, the ancient Arsinoe. The large bricks of which it is formed are made of black, loamy, friable earth, or Nile-mud, compacted with chopped straw, in the same way that such bricks are still made in Egypt and elsewhere in the East. There are other such pyramids at Dashour and Saccara, differing little except in size and degree of preservation. The pyramid at Faioum stands on an elevated, sandy plateau; and its base is a square of 122 yards, its present height being 197 feet. This and the other brick pyramids have not obtained the degree of notice they deserve, the attention of travellers having been too exclusively engrossed by the pyramids of Ghizeh. The French, however, discovered a subterraneous passage to this pyramid, and found within a sarcophagus and also a salt spring. It will be seen that, in common with most of the other structures of the same material, it has lost much of its pyramidal form, and approaches to that of a mound; and if the reader turns to the cut of the Birs Nemroud near Babylon, and compares the two, with the recollection that the material of both is sun-dried bricks, he will be led to conclude that there was much resemblance, if not identity, in form and intention between the now ruined mounds of Babylonia and the existing pyramids of Egypt. It is a remarkable confirmation of this view that Herodotus, who describes the Tower of Babylon as a pyramid with graduated stories diminishing with the ascent, mentions the pyramids of Egypt as being similarly constructed, with stories or platforms diminishing in size as they rose in height, and is understood to state that they were afterwards completed to a smooth surface by being coated with blocks of stone, which filled up the interstices between the different stories so as to obliterate the graduated by a sloping appearance. Observations on the pyramids have confirmed this account of their construction. The greatest of the pyramids at Ghizeh is built in diminishing stages, nor does any trace remain to indicate that it ever had an outer series of stones to give it a smooth surface. We may then consider as essentially identical the pyramids of the Nile with those graduated structures which are found, in various states of preservation, not only on the banks of the Euphrates, but on those of the Indus and Ganges.
of Levi, and took to wife a daughter of Levi.
1 Moses is born, 3 and in an ark cast into the flags. 5 He is found, and brought up by Pharaoh's daugh
2 And the woman conceived, and bare a ter. 11 He slayeth an Egyptian. 13 He re- son and when she saw him that he was a
goodly child, she hid him three months.
proveth an Hebrew. 15 He fleeth into Midian. 21 He marrieth Zipporah. 22 Gershom is born. 23 God respecteth the Israelites' cry.
AND there went a man of the house 1 Chap. 6, 20. Num. 26. 59.
3 Ånd when she could not longer hide him, she took for him an ark of bulrushes, and daubed it with slime and with pitch,
2 Acts 7. 20. Heb. 11. 23.
7 Then said his sister to Pharaoh's daughter, Shall I go and call to thee a nurse of the Hebrew women, that she may nurse the child for thee?
8 And Pharaoh's daughter said to her, Go. And the maid went and called the child's mother.
9 And Pharaoh's daughter said unto her, Take this child away, and nurse it for me, and I will give thee thy wages. And the woman took the child, and nursed it.
10 And the child grew, and she brought
3 That is, drawn out.
him unto Pharaoh's daughter, and he became her son. And she called his name Moses: and she said, Because I drew him out of the water.
11 And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren.
12. And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand.
13 And when he went out the second day, behold, two men of the Hebrews strove together: and he said to him that did the wrong, Wherefore smitest thou thy fellow?
14 And he said, Who made thee a prince and a judge over us? intendest thou to kill me, as thou killedst the Egyptian? And Moses feared, and said, Surely this thing is known.
15 Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelt in the
4 Heb. a man, a prince.
left the man? call him, that he may eat bread.
21 And Moses was content to dwell with the man: and he gave Moses Zipporah his daughter.
22 And she bare him a son, and he called his name "Gershom: for he said, I have been a stranger in a strange land.
23 And it came to pass in process of time, that the king of Egypt died: and the children of Israel sighed by reason of the bondage, and they cried, and their cry came up unto God by reason of the bondage.
24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob.
19 And they said, An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds, and also drew water enough for us, and watered the flock.
20 And he said unto his daughters, And where is he? why is it that ye have
5 Or, prince.
Chap. 18. 3.
Verse 3. “Bulrushes," N, Gome, Heb.-By comparing Isaiah xviii. 2, where we have, vessels of bulrushes," with a passage of Theophrastus when describing the papyrus, razvgès, we at once perceive that the Cyperus papyrus and the Gome are identical: zai yg hoa TOLDEN E AUTO" they make boats and ships of it." The cyperus is distinguished by its cluster of elegant little spikes, which consist of a single row of scales, ranged in a straight line on each side. These clusters are "weak," or hang down in a nodding position, and, unlike the rest of the plant, are inapplicable to any useful purpose. The root is about the thickness of a full-sized man's wrist, and more than fifteen feet in length, and so hard that all kinds of utensils were made of it. The stem is about four cubits or six feet long, was eaten raw, roasted, or boiled, and served as material for boats, sails, mats, clothes, beds, and books. Its Greek name augos has imparted its derivative to our "paper," while its Egyptian designation appears in the venerable name of "Bible." The Arabic is bardi, and the Syriac seems to intimate that it is a plant liable to wither, as it comes from a verb signifying "to flee." This harmonises with what is said in Job viii. 11, "Can the rush (or papyrus) grow up without mire? can the flag (or Cyperus esculentus) grow without water?"
“Slime,” (Chemer, Heb.) dopuλToivoa, bitumen, Vulg. mineral pitch. See the note on Gen. xi.
25 And God looked upon the children of Israel, and God had respect unto them.
7 Gen. 15. 14, and 46. 4.
8 Heb. knew.
"Pitch,", Zepheth, Pix, whence our pitch was derived from Tre, which came ultimately, by a transposition of letters, from Zepeth. The Greek and Latin terms were applied to the solid resins obtained from the pine and fir-trees. Both the mineral and the vegetable productions were employed on this occasion for the obvious purpose of keeping out the water, and thus preserving the child from its intrusion till some kind heart should be moved to pity for him. There seems to be considerable analogy between the ark or boat in which Moses was deposited and the curious vessels which are at the present day employed in crossing the Tigris. They are perfectly circular in shape, and are made with the leaves of the date-palm, forming a kind of basket-work, which is rendered impervious to the water by being thickly coated with bitumen.
"Flags," D, suph.-We are unable at present to satisfy ourselves as to what particular plant is here intended. It is more than probable, however, that suph was a general term for sea or river-weed. Theophrastus describes several plants akin to the papyrus, as common in the marshes of Egypt. Among them the Sari, which produced a root that was much used by smiths as fuel in forging their iron. The Arabic seems applicable to a species of bulrush, scirpus : the Vulgate has, "in carecto,”-in a bed of reeds. The Red Sea is always called in the Scriptures DD, yam-suph, or "the weedy sea," probably from the great variety of marine vegetables which grow in it, and which at low water are left in great quantities upon the shores. Now in Egypt this sea was, from an allusion to the same circumstance, called the Sari-Sea," which seems to demonstrate the identity of the suph with the sari.
15. "The land of Midian."-There is a difficulty attending this subject, which has not yet been indisputably settled. There seem to be two lands of Midian ;-this on the Elanitic gulf of the Red Sea; and another east and south-east of the land of Moab, which was on the east of the Dead Sea. It is therefore concluded by some good authorities, that the tribes inhabiting these lands were different people-those near the Dead Sea being the descendants of Abraham through Keturah; and those near the Red Sea being the posterity of Midian, the son of Cush. The latter conjecture is strengthened by the certainty that some of the Cushite tribes did settle in, and on the outskirts of, Arabia, which was therefore called Ethiopia in common with the different countries which the Cushites occupied. Accordingly Zipporah, the wife of Moses, is called a Cushite or Ethiopian, in Num. xii. 1; and in Habakkuk iii. 7, the Midianites are mentioned with the Cushites. There are those, however who believe that all the Midianites mentioned in Scripture are descended from Abraham; and that those near the Red Sea were merely a ramification from the same stock. That the latter were called Ethiopians, may be sufficiently accounted for by their inhabiting a country to which the name of Ethiopia was applied. We incline to this opinion; but in order not to interfere with the other, we shall notice each branch separately as the text brings it before us; and it is the more easy to do this, as the Scripture history connects the one people little, if at all, with the other. The Midianites near Moab will be noticed in the note to Num. xxii. 4.7; while those on the Red Sea will engage our present attention. There is little to say about them, as they are scarcely noticed in the Bible, except in the early chapters of this book. One of the earliest notices of the Midianites confounds them with the Ishmaelites (Gen. xxxvii. 25, 28), with whom all the tribes springing from Abraham were in the first instance closely connected, and into whose body they were all ultimately absorbed. As that notice describes them as engaged in commercial pursuits, besides being a pastoral people, and as they seem to have become a numerous and wealthy race, it would be interesting to inquire whether their settlement on the Red Sea had not some connexion with
maritime trade and navigation. We have no data on which to form distinct conclusions on this matter; but it may fairly be conjectured, that being a trading people they would, when situated on the Red Sea, scarcely abstain from building some kind of vessels in which to explore the shores of the gulf and the contiguous coasts at the least. Josephus says the people of this part of Midian were not shepherds, which allows us to imagine that they were engaged in commerce. He adds, rather contradictorily, that they left the care of their sheep to women. This agrees with the fact of Jethro's flock being watered by his daughter; and, which is still more striking, it agrees with the existing practice in this part of Arabia, where the duty of attending the flocks is considered degrading by the men, and is more entirely left to the young women than perhaps in any other part of Arabia. The territory of these Midianites on the Red Sea would seem to have extended farther southward than that of the Edomites, as it is not unlikely that the latter people ultimately superseded them altogether in these parts. These were undoubtedly the Midianites who trembled for fear when they heard that the Israelites had passed through the Red Sea (Hab. iii. 7.) The Orientals do not appear to know any other land of Midian than this. Abulfeda says that the name is preserved in a ruined city, called Madyan, on the shore of the Red Sea, on the route of the pilgrims from Egypt to Mecca. This city, he says, was the capital of the tribe of Midian among the Israelites; and that there was still to be seen near it the famous well at which Moses watered the flocks of Schoaib, as the Moslems call Jethro. Josephus mentions the "city of Madian on the Red Sea ;" and it is no doubt the same that Ptolemy calls Modianam.
1 Moses keepeth Jethro's flock. 2 God appeareth to him in a burning bush. 9 He sendeth him to deliver Israel. 14 The name of God. 15 His message to Israel.
Now Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father in law, the priest of Midian: and he led the
1 Acts 7.30.
flock to the backside of the desert, and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb.
2 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a 'flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.