Page images
PDF
EPUB

the understanding that the gulf then extended at least twenty-five miles more northerly than at present, so as to comprehend the present salt marshes. Eusebius relates, after ancient traditions, that the Hebrews crossed the gulf at Clysma. This is probably no more than one of the Arabian traditions which fixes the transaction at Kolsoum. These names and places are thought to be identical; but this identity has not been placed beyond doubt. Now Clysma is placed by many geographers at the head of the gulf, a little to the north of Suez, and just at that place the inhabitants point out some ruins as the Kolsoum of former times, and believe that the Israelites passed there. Niebuhr adopts this opinion, and has been followed by many other writers. The narrow arm of the sea that runs up here is now fordable at low water, but not at the flood tide, and in winter after the rainy season the low grounds to the northward for several miles are inundated and impassable for camels. The hypothesis of Lord Valentia seems rather too gratuitous; and to that of Niebuhr it may be objected, that so far as it is built upon tradition it is of little value, because Clysma has been fixed in so many (at least four) different places as to render it probable that the name was not a proper but a generic denomination applied to different towns, or else that there were at least two different, perhaps successive, towns called Clysma, one the parent of the other. Part of this remark applies to the supposed identical Kolsoum. The different Arabian geographers speak of Kolsoum in such a way as to show that there were two towns of that name, one at the extremity of the gulf, near Suez, and the other more than a degree south of Suez, at the foot of a mountain which continues to bear the name to this day. M. Gosselin cites one geographer who expressly says that there were two towns called Kolsoum; and, when the traditions speak of a passage as having taken place in the neighbourhood of Kolsoum, it is clear that they mean the latter place, from the fact that the bay on the opposite coast has its name (Birket-el-Faroun) from the drowning of the Egyptians, and that this part is more generally pointed out than any other as the place where the Israelites crossed the gulf. (See the end of this note.) And if tradition and local report did undoubtedly point to the place near Suez, the testimony would be worth little. Niebuhr himself observes that all the inhabitants of the coast claim the miracle for their own neighbourhood; and whenever a traveller makes inquiries on the subject, he is told that the Israelites passed the sea just at the point where the question is asked. Their more spec fic traditions refer to Ain Mousa, the valley of Badea, Wady Gharendel, Birket Faroun, and Tor. If therefore we allow the bare possibility of Niebuhr's hypothesis, it can only be on the ground of his concession, that the extremity of the gulf was more to the north, and wider and deeper than at present; but even allowing this, we should still feel at liberty to look more to the south for the place of passage, for the reasons we have already assigned.

Let us then proceed down the valley between the mountains and the sea, which we have supposed the Israelites to have taken. At the distance of about fifteen miles below Suez, occurs Ras (Cape) Addagi projecting into the sea, and which is formed by the terinination of a cluster of hills about five miles in length, which now interpose on the left between the valley and the sea, so that the road in this part has mountains on either hand for several miles. Was the entrance of this defile the mouth of the Hiroth, or pass, before which the Hebrews encamped? The cape on the opposite coast is called Ras (Cape) Moses, and near this are Fountains of Moses (Ain Mousa), which one of the most distinct traditions points out as the scene of the miracle. The claims of Ain Mousa above Suez in the present, and indeed in any, state of the gulf, are, that if the Israelites crossed here, they must have been more completely “shut in” than at Suez, between the mountains, the wilderness, and the sea--that it is far enough from the bottom of the gulf to account for the Egyptians not going round to intercept them as they came up from the sea-that the waters being here deeper and broader, the miracle would be the more conspicuous and unquestionable, and at the same time the waters would be the more adequate to overwhelm the Egyptian host; while still the channel is not too broad for the Hebrew host to pass through in a single night. It is true that Dr. Shaw does not think the water deep enough even here; but there is every reason to conclude that the water was deeper formerly than at present, and the same objection certainly applies with still greater force to the passage at Suez. Let us however proceed southward, and having traversed the pass, and continued our course along the shore, we come to an expansion or bay, forming the mouth, towards the Red Sea, of a valley or opening in the mountains, which is here called Badea, and also Waly Tyh, or “the Valley of Wandering," and which, under the various names of Wady Ramlia, Derb Towarek, Wady Jendeli, &c. extends from the Nile to the Red Sea, and through which a canal of communication seems to have formerly ran. Was this the Hiroth, or pass, before or in the mouth of which the Israelites encamped, and from which they afterwards made their famous passage? Many good authorities are of this opinion; and it deserves to be mentioned that D'Anville and Major Rennel concur in fixing the town of Clysma at this spot. Certainly no body of men could be more effectually shut in than in this bay of Badea. There are many indications that an arın of the sea, now filled up, stretched a considerable way into the opening at this place, and must have prevented all further progress to the south ; and if such progress had not been thus prevented, it would be so by the mountains of Ghobebe, which bound the bay and valley on the south, and which, with their continuations, stand out so close to the sea as to preclude the continuation of the march along the shore. There was therefore no retreat but through the sea, or back to Egypt through the valley; and, on the hypothesis that there was then, as at present, a practicable road through this valley between the Red Sea and the Nile, we hazard a conjecture, that it was Pharaoh's intention to drive them back before him through this valley. As names and traditions, on one side of the sea, point the egress of the Hebrews at Ain Mousa--as, on the other side, the same authorities place the ingress at Badea—and as it is necessary to assume that the opening was most extensive, we might hazard a conjecture that the whole opening extended from about Ain Mousa to opposite Badea. We must again repeat, however, that not the least stress is to be laid on the unsupported traditions of the natives. Ain Mousa is only one out of many places which they indicate as the point of passage. Perhaps the place which both Arabian and Egyptian traditions most strongly indicate is the large bay called Birkel Faroun (Pharaoh's Pool), about the 29th parallel of latitude. The waters of this bay are in continual commotion, which the natives think to be occasioned by the unquiet spirits of the drowned. But the passage cannot reasonably be fixed here or any where else below Wady Gharendel at the lowest : for not only does the gulf from thence downward become too wide to have been crossed by such a body as the host of Israel in one night, but the shore, which till thereabout is low and sandy, then becomes rocky and mountainous, while that on the Egyptian side is still more impracticable-affording a convenient place neither for the ingress nor egress of such a multitude. Upon the whole, we should think the claims of Ain Mousa far preferable to those of Suez, and those of Badea at least equal to those of Ain Mousa. The statements in this and other notes cannot well be appreciated without a reference to carefully prepared maps; and we may take this opportunity of announcing, that in order to render the present work the more complete, a set of Bible maps will ultimately be prepared. That they are not at present issued, is in order that they may receive the full benefit of the investigations which the progress of the work will render necessary.

7. Chariols.”—In the note to Gen. xlv. 19, we have remarked on the early existence of wheel-carriages in Egypt. That country was famous for those vehicles in very ancient times ; and that they ultimately fell into disuse is probably owing to the number of canals which were progressively cut, and which in the course of time so intersected the country as to renderit no longer suitable for such conveyances. Goguet ingeniously traces the origin of the idea of wheel

[graphic][ocr errors][merged small]

carriages from sledges, which must have been first invented. The use of rollers must also have been early discovered and when men had both these inventions they began to reflect, that if they could join the sledge to the rollers, without impeding their turning round, it would greatly lessen their labour. By these steps they at last came to the discovery of wheels. At first the wheels were without spokes, as they still are generally in those parts of Asia where wheelcarriages are in use, being made of one solid piece of wood. The ancient Egyptians, as well as the Persians, had spoked-wheels to their chariots, as appears from existing paintings and sculptures. Goguet is of opinion that riding in carriages preceded the practice of mounting a horse. Ancient monuments and historical notices certainly favour his hypothesis; and, as he observes, to guide the simple cars which were then in use must have been a much less complex and difficult art than that of riding on horseback. That in ancient history we read so much of chariots, and little or nothing of cavalry in battle, Goguet thinks to be accounted for by the fact that a horseman has his attention divided between the care of fighting and that of managing his beast; whereas, a warrior in a chariot can give all his attention to fighting, the charge of the horses being consigned to a charioteer. This is true generally; but it is remarkable that it does not apply to the Egyptians. In all the plates from Egyptian drawings which we have examined, we do not remember to have seen charioteers employed to guide the chariot. The warrior himself, standing erect in his chariot, and in full warlike action, has the reins lashed around his waist, and seems to control the horses by the movements of his body. The Egyptian chariot is commonly a small box mounted on two low wheels. There are commonly two horses to each car, and the animals are adorned with rich trappings, and bear plumes of feathers on their heads. The warrior, who has scarcely more than standing room in his car, is in most cases furnished with bow and arrows, or a javelin ; but sometimes has in his hand a weapon not unlike a reaping-hook, but not so much curved. The chariot-warriors are sometimes represented as fighting on foot, while the heads of those they have slain are fixed in different parts of the car; and sometimes captives are represented as dragged along behind the chariot of the conqueror. These Egyptian paintings must be interesting to the reader of the Bible, as indicating the sort of treatment to which the Hebrews would have been subjected had not their Divine Protector interposed his miraculous aid.

9. Horsemen.”—The earliest armies were no doubt wholly composed of infantry. The art of using animals in war must have been for some time unknown; and savages, to this day, do not employ them. But, ultimately, when methods were found out of subjecting the stronger animals to the control of man, the idea of using the more spirited in war would naturally occur. Accordingly, in the histories of different nations, we read of various animals being thus employed-as horses, elephants, camels, dogs, and even lions; but we do not know at what period these customs were introduced. We know, however, from Gen. xlix. 17, that the art of riding on horseback was known in Egypt so early as the time of Jacob. Indeed, the profane historians represent this art as an Egyptian invention, attributing it either to Osiris himself or to his son Orus, which at least shows that they thought its invention in Egypt very ancient. It seems to have been an object of ambition with the kings of Egypt to keep a great number of horses. Diodorus mentions that the kings before Sesostris had a hundred stables each for 200 horses on the banks of the Nile, between Thebes and Memphis ; and when the Hebrew kings were infected with a similar taste they got their horses, and also their chariots, from Egypt. Heeren is undoubtedly mistaken in saying that the Egyptians used horses only for chariots, not for riding, and that no mounted figures are represented in Egyptian paintings. We have not only the express testimony of Scripture for the fact, but that testimony is corroborated by paintings. See, for instance, Hamilton's Ægyptiaca, plate ix. That great attention was paid to the breeding of horses, and that Egypt had a valuable breed,

[ocr errors]

would appear as well from the paintings as from their being much prized in other countries. Historians state that
horses were exclusively used for war and luxury; and the paintings confirm this testimony, the horse being
never represented as employed in any kind of agricultural labour. The ultimate neglect of the horse in Egypt is easily
accounted
for. In the declining state of that

country, the
warriors, being discouraged, gradually

forgot their

former habits and the tastes connected with them; and as the horse was exclusively used by this class of the population, the cultivators, who had themselves no use for the animal, ceased to interest themselves in its reproduction, or in the improvement or preservation of the breed. (See Goguet, ‘Origine des Lois ;' Heeren, 'Egyptiens ; ' Raynier, ' Economie Publique et Rurale des Egyptiens,' &c.)

21.“ The LORD caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. 22 And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground : and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left.” –We have quoted this text at length, in order to mark the distinctness with which every circumstance is enumerated to demonstrate the miraculous character of this event, and to preclude any attempt to account for it on natural causes. The terms seem purposely intended to guard against any possible natural hypothesis, which might be or has been adduced. The natural operation of any wind could only have driven back the water from the extremity of the gulf, and even this could not be effected by an east wind, which, however, was the best calculated, under the Divine direction, to strike a passage through the gulf; but no wind, not even an east wind, could do this in the terms described, without an extraordinary exhibition of the Divine power. And that the waters were not simply driven back from the head of the gulf, either by a wind, or by an extraordinary fall of the tide, is shown by this--that the waters could not then be divided, but only driven back, nor could then the waters have been a wall to them on the right hand and on the left, but only on the right. And that they did not pass merely at a ford—that is, on a shallow place, or ledge of rocks—as some conjecture, is evinced as well by the express statement that they passed on dry land, as from the difficulty of supposing that, encumbered as they were with children, flocks, and herds, with a hostile army on their rear, they could have got through even a small depth of water. We have examined the whole subject with great attention, and our decided conviction is, that there is no possibility of accounting for the circumstance on any natural cause which is commonly assigned, without either explaining away the force and obvious meaning of this and the other passages of Scripture which refer to the same event, or else rejecting the testimony of Scripture altogether. We really do not see any other alternative. It seems to us that there is no Old Testament miracle more independent of natural causes than this. It is true that the natural agency of an east wind was employed; but it is obvious that the natural operation alone of any wind could not have produced this result; and if it could, the miracle remains--the wind being made to come at the moment, and to blow as long as it was wanted, and to cease at the critical time when its cessation involved the Egyptian host in destruction. In fact, the east wind itself is a miracle. There is no such thing as a natural east wind in all this region. The monsoon Ilows steadily from the north during one half the year, and from the opposite point in the other half. That the event altogether had no resemblance to any phenomenon which the Red Sea exhibited at other times, is evinced by the incidental but unequivocal acknowledgment of the neighbouring nations (see the texts referred to in the note to chap. xiii. 20), and by the astonishment and alarm which it inspired. Its effect upon the Hebrews themselves equally proves the miraculous character of the transaction. When they saw the "great work” which the Lord had done to seal their redemption from Egypt, they believed in Him; and in after times its stupendous and undoubted character occasioned their successive historians, prophets, poets, and didactic writers, more frequently to refer to this miracle than to any other of the extraordinary manifestations of Divine power which the Old Testament records.

[graphic]

The Red Sea, VIEWED FROM RAS MOHAMMED, ON THE SOUTII-WEST Coast or ARABIA-PETRA.

[graphic][merged small]

CHAPTER XV.

up against thee: thou sentest forth thy 1 Moses' song: 22 The people want water. 23 The wrath, which consumed them as stubble.

waters at Marah are bitter. 25 A tree sweeteneth 8 And with the blast of thy nostrils the them. 27 At Elim are twelve wells, and seventy waters were gathered together, the floods palm trees.

stood upright as an heap, and the depths THEN sang 'Moses and the children of were congealed in the heart of the sea. Israel this song, unto the Lord, and spake, 9 The enemy said, I will pursue, I will saying, I will sing unto the LORD, for he overtake, I will divide the spoil; my lust hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and shall be satisfied upon them; I will draw his rider hath he thrown into the sea. my sword, my hand shall 'destroy them.

2 The LORD is my strength and song, and 10 Thou didst blow with thy wind, the he is become my salvation : he is my God, sea covered them: they sank as lead in the and I will prepare him an habitation; my mighty waters. father's God, and I will exalt him.

i1 Who is like unto thee, O LORD, among 3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD the #gods? who is like thee, glorious in holiis his name.

ness, fearful in praises, doing wonders ? 4 Pharaoh's chariots and his host hath 12 Thou stretchedst out thy right hand, he cast into the sea : his chosen captains the earth swallowed them. also are drowned in the Red sea.

13 Thou in thy mercy hast led forth the 5 The depths have covered them : they people which thou hast redeemed: thou hast sank into the bottom as a stone.

guided them in thy strength unto thy holy 6 Thy right hand, O LORD, is become habitation. glorious in power: thy right hand, O Lord, 14 The people shall hear, and be afraid : hath dashed in pieces the enemy;

sorrow shall take hold on the inhabitants of 7 And in the greatness of thine excel. Palestina. lency thou hast overthrown them that rose 15 Then the dukes of Edom shall be amazed; the mighty men of Moab, trem- 22 So Moses brought Israel from the Red bling shall take hold upon them; all the sea, and they went out into the wilderness inhabitants of Canaan shall melt away. of Shur; and they went three days in the

3 Or, mighty ones.

1 Wisd. 10. 20.

2 Or, repossess.

* Deut. 2. 35. Josh, 2. 9.

16 'Fear and dread shall fall upon them; wilderness, and found no water. hy the greatness of thine arm they shall be 23 | And when they came to Marah, as still as a stone; till thy people pass over, they could not drink of the waters of Marah, O Lord, till the people pass over, which for they were bitter: therefore the name of thou hast purchased.

it was called “Marah, 17 Thou shalt bring them in, and plant 24 And the people murmured against them in the mountain of thine inheritance, Moses, saying, What shall we drink? in the place, O LORD, which thou hast made 25 And he cried unto the LORD, and the for thee to dwell in, in the Sanctuary, 0 LORD shewed him a "tree, which when he LORD, which thy hands have established. had cast into the waters, the waters were

18 The LORD shall reign for ever and eyer, made sweet: there he made for them a sta

19 For the horse of Pharaoh went in with tute and an ordinance, and there he proved his chariots and with his horsemen into the hem, sea, and the LORD brought again the waters 26 And said, If thou wilt diligently of the sea upon them; but the children of hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, Israel went on dry land in the midst of the and wilt do that which is right in his sight, sea.

and wilt give ear to his commandments, and 20 And Miriam the prophetess, the keep all his statutes, I will put none of sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; these diseases upon thee, which I have and all the women went out after her with brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the timbrels and with dances.

LORD that healeth thee. 21 And Miriam answered them, Sing ye 27 And they came to Elim, where were to the Lord, for he hath triumphed glori- | twelve wells of water, and three-score and ously; the horse and his rider hath he ten palm trees: and they encamped there thrown into the sea.

by the waters. 5 Deut. 2. 25. Josh. 2. 9. 6 That is, bitterness. 7 Ecclus, 38, 5. 8 Num. 33.9.

[graphic][merged small]
« PreviousContinue »